From Digital Foundry: "Welcome to the third part in the biggest DF Retro episode we've ever produced - a year-by-year look at how 1080p gaming fared on the PlayStation 3. Launched in 2007 touting its then-exclusive HDMI digital interface, Sony layered full HD gaming on top of its Cell processor and RSX 'Reality Synthesizer' as key selling points for its third generation console. Of course, we all know how that turned out - both Sony and Microsoft machines routinely ran the most advanced titles at sub-720p resolutions, often with questionable performance, so what happened to the 1080p dream?
In the first two parts of John Linneman's investigation, we've covered off the first four years of the Triple's lifecycle and moving into 2010, the overall fortunes of the PlayStation 3 continued to improve. The platform holder released - what was then - the most advanced motion controller in the console space, backed up by experiments with stereoscopic 3D, which turned out to be a short-lived but still formidable pairing. Combined with a strong E3 showing, PS3 was looking good.
However, it's fair to say that it was a fallow year for 1080p gaming on the system, with only Scott Pilgrim Saves The World's razor-sharp pixel art upscaling, Castle Crashers and Soldner X2's 3D/FMV stylings accommodating full HD output - alongside a wonderful Monkey Island remaster."
The Persona / Shin Megami Tensei cosplay gathering allowed fans of the acclaimed JRPG series to meet up during FanimeCon 2024.
Frame generation technology has arrived on consoles, amplifying frame-rates and potentially transforming experiences.
adds between 8.3-15.3 milliseconds of latency on the game they tested, - no thanks
Impressive results... sadly I don't have a 120hz display. I was thinking this technique could increase fps on any game that supports it regardless of the display.
I have a vrr telly in the lounge,
On another point, what if it were the other way around where the developer aims for higher fps, then used something like pssr to make the resolution higher, that might be better?
Any which way, PS5 pro sure looks interesting now, being they have already doubled frame rate, with JUST just this fsr3.0
Yes it would increase the framerate but it would add more noticeable latency. The impact of latency goes down the more natural frames produced. So a monitor that can push bast 60 will naturally allow the game to operate much smoother. Add VRR to this and now you have a much more enjoyable experience.
no, it delivers approx 80fps.
which is why I say why not target 60fps with this new tech and use the upscaling pssr, (Sonys version of Nvidia's DLSS, that seems so popular in the pc realm)
then we have best of both, better believe ps5pro will be doing all the above.
Now I've extensively tried it I'm not too fussed about 120 fps. Give me a locked 60 and more details and I'm more than happy
The Epic Games Store has yet another free game, and it's a pretty damn good one.
Oh yeah B-)
Just remember ladies and gentlemen, Sony never said all games would be 1080p. Only that the system would support games up to 1080p in a survey before the system was released.
https://spong.com/article/9...
And as we saw, some games did support it, some games tried their best to support it and some games didn't or never reached it.
Is a higher resolution great to have if you can do it? Sure. Is it necessary for a fun game? No
But what I find interesting is Eurogamer. Are they really talking about HD and PS3 in their article or are they really pushing their 4.50 Euros 4K video download subscription? Seems one is being used to sell the other. Just look at the bottom of the article.
This really feels like a filler article. I don't feel like I learned anything notable or substantial from this. I feel they could have reduced the unnecessary intro and over-explanation of things and put the whole series in one article for a more substantial and possibly informative piece rather than piece-mealing it out as they have.