Login | Signup

Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is the latest 720p vs 1080p Xbox One casualty

Author:
Jonathan Lester
Category:
News
Tags:
Kojima Productions, Konami, PS4, PS4 games, Stealth Games, Xbox One, Xbox One Games

Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is the latest 720p vs 1080p Xbox One casualty

Comparison Shots show FOX Engine in action

The divisive 'Resolution Wars' continue unabated, as yet another game reveals very different resolution targets on the PS4 and Xbox One. Hideo Kojima has confirmed that Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes runs at a native 1080p on Sony's machine, but will be upscaled from 720p on Microsoft's platform. Here we go again, as they say.

Regardless of your stance on the matter, however, a new clutch of comparison screenshots demonstrate that we're in for a handsome visual experience on all platforms - even including last-gen consoles.

The Konami Blog makes no bones about the performance gap, offering a handy chart in a new post.

Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is the latest 720p vs 1080p Xbox One casualty

So... there you have it.

A handful of comparison screenshots provide an interesting look at Ground Zeroes' graphical prowess. Though the PS4 and Xbox One versions aren't directly compared (a canny move on Konami's part), it's clear that the current-gen versions are a cut above their last-gen counterparts, but the eminently scalable Fox Engine is still capable of producing a handsome-looking game on PS3 and Xbox 360. Frankly, the Xbox One version appears to be no slouch either - and hopefully will benefit from a newly-declawed sharpening filter.

Both the Xbox One and PS4 versions ostensibly run at 60 frames per second, which is something at least. Personally, I've always been much more concerned about blistering stable frame rates than native resolution (horses for courses: that's the way my brain works), but the Xbox One's seeming inability to match the PS4 in performance terms is starting to worry even the most stoic of us. When the most expensive console is also the least conventionally powerful, you know that something has gone dangerously amiss, and it's easy to understand why some gamers are nonplussed at the idea of spending £420+ for a console that appears to struggle with 1080p output.

We suspect that the Xbox One's 32MB cache of ESRAM is acting a little like the PS3's Cell Processor; a stumbling block that developers will have to circumvent over the coming months and years, potentially leading to improved performance as new drivers roll out and studios become more experienced with the technology. Mind you, Microsoft will have demonstrate this very soon to avoid the PS4 scoring further points. Or, you know, secure more essential first party exclusives that render the discussion meaningless. Preferably both.

After all, it's all too easy for discussions over sales figures, raw numbers and performance to overshadow fun.

I'm enjoying the gaming experience on my Xbox One, but we're not in the business of making excuses for console manufacturers. Microsoft needs to address this issue, and do so quickly. Where do you stand, do you care one way or the other, and are you planning on buying Ground Zeroes when it releases next month?

Add a comment23 comments
DivideByZero  Feb. 17, 2014 at 13:26

PS4 has 50% more graphics cores.

PS4 has DDR5 ram running at 5.5ghz against the xbox ones DDR3 at 2.1ghz.

Any hopes people have that the Xbox One will get easier to program for and games will get better need to keep in mind that SO WILL THE PS4.

The PS4 is clearly a more powerful machine and sales figures may suggest that people are interested in this, seeing as sales of the PS4 are about double that of the Xbox One and it still hasn't released in Japan yet.

JonLester  Feb. 17, 2014 at 14:08

Erm, yeah, basically. It's clear that Microsoft needs to both improve performance and more importantly lower the price point as a matter of urgent priority.

The fact that the pricier machine is also demonstrably the least powerful is... very worrying, if not unviable. Over the last few months I've found my stance shifting from "never mind, so long as the game is fun and runs at a decent clip" to "erm, this is actually fairly embarrassing."

Last edited by JonLester, Feb. 17, 2014 at 15:07
stevenjameshyde  Feb. 17, 2014 at 15:03

Surely the argument is that devs will eventually figure out how to make multiplats run at 1080p/60fps on the Xbone, and that the PS4 versions will stay there rather than pushing onwards towards 4k?

That said, the difference in exclusives should continue to be substantial as the generation progresses. Infamous vs. Titanfall should bring some proper fanboys out of the woodwork...

DivideByZero  Feb. 17, 2014 at 16:37

Maybe, but I'll be rocking Titanfall at 1080/120fps on PC so I'm not going to feel too sore about that one.

Kopite211  Feb. 18, 2014 at 00:09

Well, this just backs up my decision to pick up a second hand PS4. It seems that the Xbox just can't handle multi platform coding at 1080p the majority of the time whereas the PS4 clearly can. Mark my words this will happen with Destiny, Watchdogs and many of the high profile multi plats. You can't take advantage of the Xboxes architecture fully if you're coding for both platforms.

Anarchist  Feb. 18, 2014 at 10:16

Maybe, but I'll be rocking Titanfall at 1080/120fps on PC so I'm not going to feel too sore about that one.


...And the whole world simultaneously didn't give a ****.

DivideByZero  Feb. 18, 2014 at 11:00

Whereas your comment adds so much depth to the discussion.

My point is that Titanfall is not an exclusive and probably wont be close to being the best way to play the game.

Anarchist  Feb. 18, 2014 at 11:24

Whereas your comment adds so much depth to the discussion.

My point is that Titanfall is not an exclusive and probably wont be close to being the best way to play the game.


And my point is that your point is 25 years old and completely irrelevant. All through the PC/console era, consoles have always been outpowered by decent spec PC's.

You could use the same comment about *every* game that is available on both console and PC.

But you don't. And why? Because of the incredible amounts of butthurt that the sony fanboys are showing towards Titanfall. From the false rumours that it was going to be 30fps, to the calls of 'ITS JUST ANOTHER COD!' from those that have never seen/played it, to the 'My PC will run it better' (duh) comments from the rest. It's almost like Mass Effect all over again, well, up to the point where Mass Effect was released on PS3 then all the hate was rescinded and fine again.

Grow up and stop acting like such a little bi*ch. It's a lump of plastic that shows pictures on another lump of plastic - we're not talking about your mums reputation or anything.

Last edited by Anarchist, Feb. 18, 2014 at 11:25
DivideByZero  Feb. 18, 2014 at 13:29

"grow up" - lol, bit rich coming from your brat rage.

Titanfall is not an exclusive and the Xbox One is underpowered compared to the PS4 (and obviously PC). Deal with it.

When you get a new generation of console come out it's the one time you are closest to PC performance and so you're going to see loads of comparisons over the coming months.

Also, 25 years ago the Sega Mega Drive came out and that would have been kicking home computers **** for graphics. PCs didn't really start taking off till about 4 years after that with the introduction of games like Doom and Quake - dedicated hardware following their popularity. But you know, make stuff up if you like.

Anarchist  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:07

Sega Megadrive - released 1990. I had one on release.

Amiga 2000 - released... 1987? It's a PC. Albeit not Intel x86 architecture, but still a PC. Which at the time with its video toaster was doing graphics for TV shows, and running games, demos and applications far more advanced than the Megadrive.

Wolfenstein 3d, released in 1992 (?). I had it on my PC, and had a lot of envious mates.

The xbone and ps4 are **** compared to a top end PC. Everybody with any sense knows this, yet brain dead morons keep insisting on using it in arguments like its some sort of special trump card.

Well guess what, we all know, and we all collectively don't give a ****.

Nobody has ever claimed that xbone was 'more powerful' than the PS4. Yet you seem to have some sort of plastic vendetta, arguing against people who don't exist. We get it, we know you prefer the PS4 because there are some numbers that are higher and that seems to be the only thing you're capable of working out. And we don't give a ****.

I don't give a **** that Titanfall is not an xbox exlusive. I don't give a **** that the PS4 has some numbers that are higher than the xbones numbers.

As I said before, grow the **** up and stop acting like a spoilt little bi*ch who's had his marbles stolen.

Last edited by Anarchist, Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:08
Late  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:18

Enough with the disinformation, chaps.
We all know the xbox One is way more powerful than a pc.

MattGardner  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:35

I really wish that our profanity censor replaced words with kitchen utensils rather than asterisks.

Or animal body parts from a random generator.

"I don't give a hippo's liver that Titanfall is not an xbox exlusive. I don't give a meerkat's chin that the PS4 has some numbers that are higher than the xbones numbers."

X10  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:38

My brain has more processing power than all 3 put together....now if I could only find a way of projecting the games I make-up in my mind....

CarlPhillips  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:39

Or, right, a selection of fine meats.

"I couldn't give a glazed ham that the FPS is below 60!"

Hmmmm. Glazed ham.

Late  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:40

I never knew I wanted an animal body part random generator for censorship of swear words until just now.
Damnit, Matt - now I NEED it. Why to you taunt me so, you gerbil's elbow?

X10  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:42

Damnit, Matt - now I NEED it. Why to you taunt me so, you gerbil's elbow?


Seconded!
If we get a third I'll code it myself!

DivideByZero  Feb. 18, 2014 at 14:43

I don't give a **** that the PS4 has some numbers that are higher than the xbones numbers.


If you don't care, why are you bothering to post in a thread specifically about that? Well done.

stevenjameshyde  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:00

Thirded. Sounds like a gibbon's cheeking awesome idea

MattGardner  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:07

Or, right, a selection of fine meats.

"I couldn't give a glazed ham that the FPS is below 60!"

Hmmmm. Glazed ham.


Food products are definitely on the table.

Also I'm now really hungry you turducken-stuffed kangaroo's windpipe!!

Late  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:22

Don't use food. You'll get Jon thinking about sandwiches and he'll get nothing done.

Anarchist  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:34

I don't give a **** that the PS4 has some numbers that are higher than the xbones numbers.


If you don't care, why are you bothering to post in a thread specifically about that? Well done.


Because your Pandas Testicle post was nothing to do with that. It was about you thinking you've just come up with the worlds most original post by claiming your PC is better than consoles - 25 years too late for it to be relevant. Just because you're butthurt that Titanfall isn't coming to PS4. You've just completely and utterly self failed, GG, you Badgers Kneecap clown.

Last edited by Anarchist, Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:37
JonLester  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:37

@Late: How dare you suggest that I get easily distracted by tender vittles! Why just today, I painstakingly reviewed a gorgeous multi-platform club sandwich that outputs at 1080 calories, sporting crisp lettuce visuals, advanced HDR (horseradish dressing relish) and impressive bloom...er bread.

Oh god, I have a problem.

EDIT: I also love that, in the sidebar, your comment excerpt reads "Don't use food. You'll get Jon thin"

Oh, if only! :P

Last edited by JonLester, Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:52
MattGardner  Feb. 18, 2014 at 15:45

That sounds lush. Better than my 720peas.

Email Address:

You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.