The Instigator
Dishoungh
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
matspub
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

Resolution (Pro) vs Framerate/Stability of a Game (Con) (Please read my post on the first round)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Dishoungh
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/28/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 643 times Debate No: 65986
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

Dishoungh

Con

As it says in the title, please read this to gain an understanding of the context of the debate. Well, you should read it anyway because you're supposed to, but for some reason, some people still miss to read this part to get some context and they end up misunderstanding the point. Anyway, I don't want any of you to get the wrong idea before you sign in to debate with me because it's really hard to summarize the context of this debate as a simple title. So please read to understand what I'm debating on and the rationale of the debating topic. Thank you. :)
____________________________________________________________

Overview

I haven't debated in a while, so my debating skills may be a little rusty, but that's okay. My position on this debate is to attack the #PS4NoParity hastag and the Resolution movement that's been going on lately in the gaming crowd. I will argue that developers shouldn't sacrifice the stability and functionality of a game, just to say that the game runs at 1080p. My opponent will defend this opposition. My opponent will argue that developers shouldn't aim for parity between both consoles and/or any other sort of argument that makes this position valid and understandable, but counters my position. The rationale of this debate is that I feel that there is a huge problem that's both affecting gaming (the games themselves) and the gaming community with it. So, I am here to address it. Also, I'm very curious to see the perspective of my opponent.
____________________________________________________________

Round Organization

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Argument Presentation
Round 3: Presenting More Arguments/Rebutting Arguments
Round 4: Presenting More Arguments/Rebutting Arguments (Cont.)
____________________________________________________________

Additional Rules

1. Profanity will not be tolerated

2. Belittling one's opinion or point of view will also not be tolerated, as this is a site that's designed to have people share their ideas and opinions with one another. I'm an advocate of positive online ettiquette. We will not berate people's opinions here. Any act of aggression or hostility will result in an automatic deduction in conduct.

Ex: "You're stupid/retarded for having X opinion"
____________________________________________________________
matspub

Pro

I accept the challenge and good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Dishoungh

Con

Now, we shall begin. Now, I can't really portray my arguments in a numerical structure. I can, but I prefer to show my arguments in a different way. I'll try to make my direct arguments apparent. I don't want anyone to be confused. I'll just do my best.
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Arguments and Points

I'm here to believe that gamers who complain if a game is 1080p and going around spreading this belief that consoles are so much different from each other and that the PS4 should get the much superior version. But, history has shown that those types of gamers are clearly misinformed and their argument holds no factual value. Let me explain. If you're a gamer or an informed gamer who is active in recent gaming news that is, you should be aware that this resolution debate was going on for quite some time, ever since the 8th generation consoles came out. But, this debate was taken to the next level when Ubisoft came out and said that both consoles were going to run Assassin's Creed Unity at 900p. Then, the outrage emerged and everyone started making this No Parity movement. Now, I want to attack this movement and simply say that this movement is, how can I put this nicely, impractical. I'll say that because I don't want to be docked for conduct. Anyway, here's why.

___________________________________________________________________
Argument 1
Most of the arguments that these gamers throw around is that the PS4 is so much "superior" to the Xbox One.

Although that is true generally, I have to say that assertion is simply over-exaggerated because many tests and sources state otherwise.

According to sources from DigitalFoundry, a source that does in-game framerate tests on various games, there were many cases that the PlayStation 4 had the inferior test in overall performance, while the Xbox One had the better test in performance, although the PS4 were running the games at full 1080p and the Xbox One at sub-1080p.


Test 1
("Assassin's Creed Unity falls short of the performance standard set by last year's Black Flag, featuring considerably more variable frame-rates under load on both consoles. Given the immense graphical upgrade on offer, this isn't so surprising, but what comes as a bit of a shock is that the Xbox One version frequently out-performs the PS4 game in more detail-rich areas, such as locations littered with NPCs in the packed Parisian streets. The opening clip in our video below perfectly demonstrates the difference between the two consoles. Wading through dozens of NPCs in a crowded square, performance drops down to around 20fps for a sustained duration on the PS4 while the Xbox One achieves a 5fps lead. In a later gameplay test traversing the rooftops, we see frame rates regularly fluctuate between 25-30fps across both consoles, but here the Xbox One game sticks more closely to the upper end of that spectrum than its Sony equivalent.")

~Digital Foundry (Assassin's Creed Unity)
[https://www.youtube.com...]
[http://www.eurogamer.net...]

In case you’re not aware of the hardware of the two systems, the Xbox One has a slightly better APU than the PlayStation 4. That means it was able to handle more CPU-laborious situations, especially when there’s many NPCs on screen because the Xbox One’s slightly better APU was able to render the A.I. I’ll go further detail into both of the consoles’ hardware later.

Okay, yes, Assassin’s Creed Unity was a bad game from the get-go. The game was buggy and a bad game optimization-wise on every platform it came across. So, it can be argued that it was just “bad development.” So, yeah, that might not be the best example. What about another example?

Test 2

("In the main, asset quality is identical between the two platforms. From the handling of shadow rendering to texture detail, there's little to distinguish the Xbox One release from the PS4. But based on the first three campaign levels we've analysed in-depth, the larger disparity is in PERFORMANCE rather than in-game visuals.")
~ Digital Foundry (Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare)
[https://www.youtube.com...]

[http://www.eurogamer.net...]

So, again here, the Xbox One was able to get the more “stable” version out of both versions. The Xbox One ran this game at fluctuating resolutions, which means that in intensive situations, the resolution drops down to 1440x1080p and it goes back to full HD when things calm down. The PS4 runs the game at full HD throughout the entire game. Yet, this game had the inferior testing in overall performance. But, maybe Sledgehammer Games was probably paid by Microsoft, which is an argument that most of these gamers use when they clearly see that the PS4 isn’t handling 1080p perfectly. What about another example?

Test 3

("Moving onto PS4, Evolve gains an advantage from delivering sharper native 1080p presentation compared to the Xbox One game, but right now this has some drawbacks when it comes down to performance in demanding scenes: frame-rates simply aren't as stable on Sony's console when the engine is under load, and this leads to more noticeable stuttering on the platform compared to Xbox One. The main issue here is that drops in performance are sustained for longer periods, and frame-rates often drop off more sharply too, which visibly draws attention to the variances in motion handling and controller response. Turns of the analogue stick feel heavy under these conditions and this makes it difficult to aim under pressure with a good degree of precision - something that can potentially turn the tide of the match. With Evolve currently in alpha mode, the developer must surely be aware of this issue and we hope to see it fixed in the final game.")
~Digital Foundry (Evolve)

[http://www.eurogamer.net...]


Test 4

("Performance-wise, both consoles do a good job of delivering a stable, consistent frame-rate but it is the Xbox One version that delivers the smoothest experience overall. Frame-rate drops are extremely rare, only appearing in the most extreme circumstances - for all intents and purposes we're looking at a locked 30fps. Unfortunately, the higher resolution on PS4 comes with a catch in the form of noticeable performance dips during strenuous sequences. During a normal run of play, the game does a good job of maintaining the target frame-rate but frame-rate faltered sometimes during battle sequences and sometimes even traversal across the landscape.")
~Digital Foundry (Dragon Age: Inquisition)
[http://www.eurogamer.net...]

Do you see a pattern how every time that when a game is 1080p on the PS4, there's a "catch", there's a "drawback"? Do you notice how the Xbox One is getting the more stable version? I guess maybe Microsoft is paying all of these developers to make a better version on their platform, right? It's maybe because Microsoft sabotaged Sony and did something to mess up their consoles, am I right? Or maybe it's the simple fact that the PS4 can’t handle 1080p comfortably. Maybe it's the fact that 1080p has a certain impact towards a game's stability and frame rate. As you can see here with all of these tests, it’s clearly obvious that because of the bumped down resolutions of the Xbox One, it’s getting better tests.

____________________________________________________________________

Argument 2

Now, about the hardware of the consoles, it’s clear that most gamers who support this movement are still convinced that the PS4 is 50 or 40% more powerful the Xbox One. It’s simply not true…in real time. You see, when people tell you how much of a difference there is in hardware, the difference will not be apparent, especially if it’s the case like this when the hardware between two consoles are mostly the same, the only major differences are between the RAM and the graphics cards. Yes, there is a difference, but it’s miniscule, according to this source that debriefs the differences in hardware between the two consoles.

[http://www.extremetech.com...]


("Again, by virtue of being an AMD APU, the Xbox One and PS4 GPUs are technologically very similar — with the simple difference that the PS4 GPU is larger.")

("In short, the PS4’s GPU is — ON PAPER — 50% more powerful than the Xbox One.")
("Once we leave the CPU/GPU, the hardware specs of the Xbox One and PS4 start to diverge, with the RAM being the most notable difference.")

("It’s nice to be able to compare hardware specs in a straightforward fashion — especially if you’re a PlayStation fan, as it clearly beats the Xbox One on paper. When it comes down to it, though, the specs mean NOTHING on their own: It’s entirely down to how Microsoft, Sony, and game developers actually use the hardware.")

You can apply this concept to PC hardware. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX 780Ti are not similar. The GTX 970 has been deemed a much superior graphics card most of the time. Some of the time, it beats the GTX 970 in some tests.

The 780Ti has more Cores in it and the 970 has a much faster clockspeed.

[http://www.geforce.com...]
[http://www.geforce.com...]

So, with hardware, you can't just look at the specifications between the two consoles and go "oh, since the teraflop number is "bigger" on the PS4, it's much better" because that's the logic I see with most uninformed gamers who spread this misconception around. They think that just because something has a "bigger" number, it's better. Although, that's true in some cases, but what really determines the difference is how the developers use it and tests have shown small differences.


I will wish my opponent good luck.
matspub

Pro

What about games like GTA 5 which became widely popular because of it's graphics and resolution.
Debate Round No. 2
Dishoungh

Con


Rebuttals


{“What about games like GTA 5 which became widely popular because of it's graphics and resolution.”}


I thank my opponent for at least, participating in this discussion. But, I don’t mean to offend Pro or his stance here, but this isn’t an argument. Okay, you could say that this is somewhat of an argument because you can see that it tries to counter my position, but it’s merely a question and questions aren’t really “good” arguments, especially if it’s like this where you don’t really bring evidence to your point and plus, this “argument” doesn’t make your point apparent, as, again, it’s a question. So, I don’t see where Pro’s point is going here.


So, enough of me bashing on him, to contend his argument, GTA 5 is the only example that my opponent has drawn. Okay, yes, the game has good graphics. And, it sounds like he's taking my position of the argumentation the wrong way. It sounds like that he's saying that I’m presuming that graphics are not important. Now, I’m not going to 100% believe that, as I could be wrong there. I’m not saying graphics aren’t important because let’s face the facts here, they are. Some of the best games or games that were critically acclaimed by both critics and consumers alike like Grand Theft Auto, like he said, Batman Arkham City, and Metal Gear Solid had at least decent or exceptional graphics; so, graphics are important to some degree and we can’t sit here and deny that. But, stability, the functionality, and the actual content of a game is the more important aspect of a video game. GTA 5 wasn’t widely popular solely because of its graphical capabilities, although it has astounding graphics, but the thing that makes Grand Theft Auto, Grand Theft Auto is the open-world, the fact that you can go around and do whatever you want, bang hookers, hijack cars, get chased by the police, and all of that, not because it has good graphics. That aspect is what the series is most known for. Since when have you heard someone say, “I only like Grand Theft Auto because of its graphics”? Sure, that may be one of their reasons, but not their only one. It’s the same thing for the Batman Arkham games, which are one of my favorite video game series ever. The thing that makes the Batman Arkham games is that you feel like you’re actually the Batman; you can sneak around and strike fear into your enemies and experiencing the darkness of the Batman, not because of the resolution, not because it’s 1080p. That goes for other popular video games. Assassin’s Creed: Parkour, Sword Combat, and Stealth. Splinter Cell: Stealth Combat. Call of Duty: Simplicity and Fun Multiplayer. None of these games that I listed have anything to do with being successful because of a game's graphics, even though they may have good graphics.


So, the original subject that we’re supposed to be talking about is that developers shouldn’t risk games to reach a resolution number, and I said last round that I will continue on presenting my arguments.


______________________________________________________________________________


So, last round, I basically gave an overview of the hardware similarities between the Xbox One and the PS4 to debunk this notion that the PS4 is “significantly better” or more “powerful” than the Xbox One, which is basically the primary mentality and rationale behind this movement. Also, to put more evidence to that, another test from DigitalFoundry that tests on Grand Theft Auto 5 show that both consoles suffer and their tests are amazingly similar to each other. Oh yeah, did I mention that both consoles run GTA 5 at 1080p.


(“In comparing PS4 and Xbox One, the end result is fascinating; it shows that while there are some scenarios that prove EQUALLY CHALLENGING for both consoles, specific areas can see one platform out-performing the other. On a native 1080p title like this, we might reasonably expect PlayStation 4's more powerful GPU to demonstrate an unassailable advantage across the game, but the reality is a little more complicated.”)


(“Travelling at speed through city junctions - such as Strawberry Avenue - turns out to be a particular Achilles Heel on PS4, with sustained drops to around the 24-26fps range at their worst. It's a situation that also applies to Xbox One, but to a consistently lesser degree when testing under the precise same conditions (and borne out in repeated tests). Put simply, in areas where junctions are stacked up one after the other, the Sony platform suffers more prolonged frame-rate drops when burning through traffic with your foot jammed to the floor. It's an interesting, recurring scenario that points to a CPU bottleneck, where Xbox One's increased clock-speed has an advantage when racing around these busy sections.”)


(“As it transpires, 1080p resolution is something of a doubled-edged sword.”)



Now, before you get it twisted again, it’s great to have both aspects (resolution and framerate) and both consoles have proven that they can run some games at 1080p and at 60 frames per second. But, if you, as a developer, whose job is to develop a game at its fullest potential, are aiming to hit 1080p on your game, at least make sure your game is stable first because I’d rather skimp out on a game if the game can’t function correctly and the game stutter every 20 seconds than to play an unstable game, but the game to be at 1080p. Also, I’m not saying that the Xbox One is better than the PS4 either. Generally, the PS4 is better.


[[http://www.eurogamer.net...]


[https://www.youtube.com...]


______________________________________________________________________________


Argument 3


So, a reason for developers to stop sacrificing games for resolution is because resolution differences aren’t that noticeable. Okay, yes, generally they can. You can see a difference between 900p and 1080p. But, the problem is that you basically need a side-by-side comparison to notice the difference. Maybe there are some who can tell naturally, but the overall majority of gamers, especially those who support this NoParity movement, can’t tell the difference if a game is 1080p or not without whipping a side-by-side comparison or some other indicator that tells them what the resolution is. It's pointless. Why would you determine or judge a game by comparing the resolution of an in-game still shot to other still shots that you would, otherwise, not have noticed naturally anyway until you compared the screenshots, rather than concerning about the game's actual ability to function correctly and the content itself? That's like judging a car by what year edition it is or how it looks rather than its condition and other important aspects like acceleration, brake times, handling, steering, and top speed. But, you can notice framerate drops, especially if it’s really major like going from 60 frames per second to the high 30’s or 30 to 15. Think of it as lag. If you play Call of Duty or any game that has an online-multiplayer mode, you know what lag is like, especially when it’s bad. Lag can ruin the online experience, but it’s inevitable. The resolution of a game affects the game’s performance. It’s like an independent-dependent variable effect. The resolution is the independent variable and the performance such as frame-rate is the dependent variable. So, when Ubisoft announced that both consoles were going to be 900p, they were doing gamers more of a favor than injustice, even though the game still released as a buggy mess. The reason was because before the game came out, they confirmed that when the game was at 1080p, the best they could get was 15fps or somewhere around that, 9fps on average. 9fps can ruin any game and having the game at 1080p would make the game MUCH WORSE than the state it was released in. But, I guess 9fps is fine with these gamers who support this movement. I guess they would rather pay 60 bucks to stare at a 1080p slideshow that’s also buggy and full of glitches.


[http://www.dualshockers.com...]


______________________________________________________________________________


As far as I’m concerned, that’s all of the arguments I can come up with the moment. I appreciate my opponent for his participation, but I wish that his arguments would be more…”substantial” because I don't want Pro to post arguments that are literally a sentence and mine are an essay. Voters will look at that and will assume me as the winner. Even if those arguments may be perfectly sound and true, people would still see that as insufficiency because some people assume that "bigger means better". That's how people think.


matspub

Pro

Im sorry for a bad debate. I thought this would be a more simple debate but you put a lot of work into it. However, I think the graphics play a lot to a game's success. I understand this is an assumption but at leat the websites I've looked at people won't buy a game if it doesn't have good graphics. Framerate and stability help but buyers when they look at the trailer mostly see the graphics thus compelling them to buy the game.
Debate Round No. 3
Dishoungh

Con

I'm sorry that my post isn't as long and substantial as I anticipated it would be. I have to make a quick argument post because I will be busy soon and I need to finish this.

{"Im sorry for a bad debate. I thought this would be a more simple debate but you put a lot of work into it. However, I think the graphics play a lot to a game's success. I understand this is an assumption but at leat the websites I've looked at people won't buy a game if it doesn't have good graphics. Framerate and stability help but buyers when they look at the trailer mostly see the graphics thus compelling them to buy the game."}

Graphics play a considerable role, but it's supportive, not a primary role. Like I said before, many examples of good games are critically acclaimed mostly because of its core mechanics and fun value of the game itself. Sure, graphics may be somewhat of an impact on a game's success (well, it kind of does, commercially). But generally, good games that we've seen aren't good games solely because of graphics. We have seen good looking games before, but have mediocre quality (Destiny, particularly the PvE aspect of the game). Furthermore, I understand that people usually look at a game's graphics in trailers, but that doesn't give developers the excuse to just skimp over a game's overall content and stable framerates just to hit a certain resolution. But, these types of gamers are misinformed and they're looking for the wrong thing, especially when they're console gamers.

But, it's not really their fault though, not that I think about it. These gamers who support this movement are usually PS4 fanboys who were the same people who started throwing this false notion around that the PS4 is "significantly better" or "50% more powerful" than the Xbox One. Earlier, I debunked that notion, as that comparision is simply over-exaggerated and the difference is not so apparent in real time as it is on paper. I've heard from someone that the real difference is approximately 10%, but I couldn't find a source to support that. So, anyway...

You see, if graphics and resolutions are your priority in games, just simply get a PC. Many times I tell these people that PCs offer you the best graphics and if you have good enough hardware, which you should if you're building a PC for at least 600 bucks, then you should already outmatch the PS4 in specs and run pretty much any game at 1080p, 60fps. I have a PC with 2 Gigabyte Geforce GTX 980's SLI, a 1440p, 144hz monitor, and an Intel Core i5-4690K (thinking about switching to an i7-4790K) and I can run any game 1440p, maximum settings, in at least 60fps (sometimes 120fps or higher). Now, I don't mean to brag here, I'm trying to make a point here and you don't really need to spend nearly $4,000 on a computer like I did because I'm extremely passionate for my build. And they tell me that I'm a fanboy, but I tell them I have a $4,000 Gaming PC, a Xbox One, a PlayStation 4, and a Wii-U. Okay, enough of me bragging; I'm getting off topic here.

So, basically, my overall point that I'm trying to make her is that I think that this resolution debate that's going on in the gaming community, especially in console gaming is ruining it in some degree. Now, I'm not saying that if you like resolution in games, you're the devil. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that this resolution debate has such a huge impact, especially for developers that now, I see developers risking a game just to hit 1080p, when there's constant framerate drops. Things like this are unacceptable, for me at least. Framerate and stability should go before resolution; that's my point.

Okay, I got to go. Thanks for participating.
matspub

Pro

As I frown on a one sided debate I concede to my opponent
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Dishoungh 2 years ago
Dishoungh
My arguments are similar to that of the structure of this video:
[https://www.youtube.com...]
Posted by Dishoungh 2 years ago
Dishoungh
I will post more direct arguments to substantiate my grounds on the next round, since I ran out of characters to type on still.
Posted by Dishoungh 2 years ago
Dishoungh
But, the topic goes a little bit more deeper than just if framerate is better than graphics or vice versa.
Posted by Dishoungh 2 years ago
Dishoungh
@Mister_Man
Yeah, that's what I'm arguing. I want to see why some gamers think otherwise.
Posted by Mister_Man 2 years ago
Mister_Man
So in a nutshell, you're arguing that performance and smooth gameplay is more important than graphical qualities?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
DishounghmatspubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
DishounghmatspubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 2 years ago
Chrysippus
DishounghmatspubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Very one-sided debate. Con did his homework and put together a very solid case - one that I hope he finds a good opponent for in a future debate. Pro was clearly not up to the challenge here.