Confirmed: Call Of Duty Ghosts At Lower Resolution On Xbox One

Confirmed: Call of Duty Ghosts at Lower Resolution on Xbox One

After a week of rumours and a day after we cited our own sources' assertions, Activision is now confirming that, yes, indeed, Call of Duty: Ghosts will run in 720p resolution on Xbox One, 1080p on PlayStation 4. 60 frames per second on both.

Technically, the Xbox One will bump Ghosts up to 1080p. On the PS4, the game will already be giving the console 1080p graphics to display. Ghosts producer Mark Rubin explained on Twitter:

Hey, been on the road last couple weeks so haven't had a chance to update, but wanted to confirm that for Xbox One we're 1080p upscaled from 720p. And, we're native 1080p on PS4. We optimised each console to hit 60 FPS and the game looks great on both. Still on the road, but glad to see the great reception to Extinction. Can't wait for next week's launch.

We had more about what this means about the two consoles in a longer piece about PS4/XboxOne graphics yesterday. Short version: it's too early to tell if PS4's hardware horsepower advantage, which it is widely believed by our development sources to have, is the reason for any graphical disparities in multiplayer games or if it's a matter of the PS4 currently seeming to be easier for developers to make games on. Hardware can't change, but tools can as can know-how regarding ways to draw the most out of a system.

To contact the author of this post, write to [email protected] or find him on Twitter @stephentotilo.


    And this is me heading for the hills. This will get messy.

      It's a bloodbath on IGN

        Really? That's unfortunate. The IGN comments are usually a rare oasis of calm, reasoned, rational debate and polite conversation in an otherwise uncivilized internet...

          haha yep IGN is nut central....having said that....PS4! PS4! PS4! ....just stirring.

            Actually now that I think about this some more (yes Im replying to my own comment), the Xbone is supposed to last for next 10 years is NEXT GENERATION stuff....yet cant do native 1080p for one of the biggest titles near launch? It is a little bit worrying I guess.

              Perhaps, but it was widely reported that MS were well behind where they should be in terms of the state of their development tools and system software etc.

              I guess if these differences are still showing up on multiplatform games 6 or 12 months from now then there will probably be cause for concern. Right now it might just be teething issues.

              The first FIFA game released on the Xbox 360 chugged terribly.

              “OH MY GOD! The Xbox 360 can’t even run a soccer game properly!” – idiots from 2006.

              The development tools are bad.
              They’re launch games put together to meet that timeframe.
              We know what hardware is in the Xbone and it’s not terrible (although by all accounts the PS4 is more powerful and at this stage easier to code for).

              Don’t get me wrong, it’s GREAT that the PS4 is handling 1st generation games well. It’s just that if people wanted they could go back and say that the 360 was incapable of running 720p because a whole stack of games in its first year ran terribly, or that the PS3 was incapable of doing open worlds because the first Assassins Creed ran poorly, or that the N64 was incapable of doing 4 player splitscreen because Mario Kart 64 had slowdown…… early games have ALWAYS had teething problems.

              The PS3 was more powerful but the 360 getting the jump on it combined with worse development tools meant that it didn’t really catch up until probably a year or two ago. We really will have to wait and see over a prolonged period of time (maybe 2 years?) how big a difference there is between the consoles. No point getting worked up over launch games.

        15.000 comments and counting. Is IGN just populated by teens or something? Because everyone I know outgrow this Nintendo vs Sega shit in the school yard.

        It's almost amusing to see people lose their shit over CoD resolution.

        Last edited 31/10/13 4:21 pm

          Well the majority of the people posting there I would imagine are CoD fans yeah probably all 12 year olds.

    I love the lame "on the road, couldn't tell you something we knew months ago because it's bad. Oh shit, got to go again! Bye."

    It was pretty obvious that this was the case when they started ducking the question last week.

    Sucks that the Xbone version is at a lower res, I'll be interested to see them side by side to see how much of a difference it makes.

    Kinda funny that everyone cares so much this gen when both consoles definitely can do 1080p, my understanding is that last gen the PS3 could do 1080p at launch but the 360 couldn't at all.... Yet nobody gave a fuck.

      Certainly very true. The thing to remember though is that at the time a lot less people owned HD tvs, and many weren't 1080p. A lot has changed the last 10 years. It'd be a bit like if they said ps4 could render at 4k, but XB1 had to render at 1080p and upscale. Some would raise a fuss, but most simply wouldn't care because they don't own a 4k tv yet.

        Agreed. I spent $2700 on a new LCD a month before the 360 launch (specifically for the 360) and it only did 720p and was only 37 inch or something like that.

        The other thing is TV’s then, particularly HD ones were a lot smaller. I remember at the time people writing that while the difference between standard def and 720p was massive, the difference between 720p and 1080p was much less noticeable unless you had a massive TV.

        These day’s massive HD TVs are much more common so I’d imagine more people will be able to notice the difference.

        I’m still keen to see what a difference it actually makes between 720p upscaled and native 1080p. I’m pretty shit at being able to tell the difference with these things. I only sit about 3m back from my 55 inch LCD and while I can see the difference between 720p and 1080p video if you flick between directly comparable scenes, if you show me an image on its own and ask me what resolution it’s in I normally can’t tell you for sure which one it is.

        wait till people start adopting 4k tv over the next few years

      Haha yeah the "on the road" part is so good, reminds me of southpark or something.

        “Hey sorry guys that I wasn’t able to answer sooner, the craziest thing happened. Last week I was driving home from the office just after production wrapped, then suddenly out of nowhere there was this bright light in the sky and I was ripped out of my car. I remember floating up into the sky and then everything went dark.

        Next thing I remember I’m naked in the middle of the desert and all my stuff is gone. It took me 2 days to walk back to civilisation at which point I’m told by Activision that I’ve been missing for well over a week! I’ve got no memory of any of it.

        Unfortunately I designed, developed, tested and certified the game all by myself and I’m the only person who knows what resolution the Xbone version runs at. All those other names on the credits- those are just aliases that I give to the tax office to hide the fact that the entire 30 million production budget goes straight into my bank account.

        Anyway, I can now tell you that the Xbone version runs at 720p upscaled to 1080p, and I’m more than happy to explain why.


          "Thankyou for all coming to this press conference it's wonderful to see you all here. Let's cut right to the chase ps4 is running natively at 1080 and XBO is 720 upscaled to 1080.... unfortunately no time for questions, gotta get back on the road.... peace and love for all, goodbye"

    No intention of buying this snoozefest of an incremental update anyway.

      Hey, that's great and Highly relevant to the topic at hand. Thanks for sharing that with us all.

        What that I don't highly value a pump and dump money printing game which they don't even bother optimizing? Give me titanfall for One or Killzone for PS4 over the tired old call of duty, which now has a dog and replaced zombies with aliens zomg.

          You know, despite how much we might scorn CoD kids, it is one of the most popular franchises on the planet. It's not inconceivable that people might base their purchasing decision purely on this Xbox/PS4 CoD resolution shitshow. This would affect console marketshare, adoption rates, developer interest and ultimately, product launches. It's another way of saying that this generation could be decided by CoD kids, whether we like it or not.

      "I don't care, I didn't want to play with you guys anyway!"

    I've stopped caring about pissy crap like this, it's not like CoD is a graphical monster anyway.

      That's what I think. There's already games that look better and run at 1080p on the Xbone. Ghosts seriously looks like a last gen game. Obviously they couldn't get their shit together in time for the Xbone version.

        But the fish move out of your way, just like Mario 64!

          Man, when I saw that during e3 I snickered. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel of new features when you tout features that have been commonplace since before I was married and had kids.

            I don't know why but I suddenly pictured Al Bundy...

              Yeah, that's strange, I wonder why ...

              (classic show by the way, and the reason I watch Modern Family almost every night).

            Starbound announced the same thing in a passing update on what the Devs were doing at the time, and that was for a 2D indie title.
            If you try to use the same thing as a selling point though and for a AAA title? Expect people to laugh

        What? You said this comment as well: "And by the looks of it COD: Ghosts is pushing the graphical limits of both systems *laugh track*" So which one are you going with? Laughing at how Ghosts isn't pushing any system very hard, or the fact that PS4 can achieve 1080p where the Xbox One can only manage 720p. Seems pretty indicative to me that Sony's console is more powerful, no matter what the margin is. The only laugh track needed is the one for how lame 'next gen' consoles are this early on in the game ... already struggling to maintain 60FPS @ 1080p. Yep, next 10 years for this generation are going to be awesome ... not.

      That's actually what makes it even more interesting when comparing the performance of the PS4 and the Xbone. A non graphical monster game can't run at native 1080p on one of these two machines... Is it a case of not enough optimisation time or is the console actually inferior. Time will tell I guess.

        Exactly my thoughts. if you can't even run CoD at 1080p when the engine has been around for 10 years, what happens when the real next gen games are released?

    And by the looks of it COD: Ghosts is pushing the graphical limits of both systems *laugh track*

    Congrats to Sony, I remember hearing so much about the older models of Playstation being pretty horrible to develop for and the Xbox being much closer to developing for PC which I guess studios were more familiar with.

    devs being forced to push out games for launch = them not having the time to work the ESRAM to its potential.

    The funny thing is that after watching the BF4 comparison on my 1080p TV, I prefer the XB1 version. It just looks less washed out, couldn't fault the graphics at all.

      It's like any of these side by side comparisons though, whether it's XBO vs PS4 or 360 vs PS3. While there are differences there, the only way you ever really notice the is when you have the two versions of the game running side by side. And in the real world who actually does that? Nobody.

      If you played one then went round your mate's place the next day and played the other version, I doubt you'd notice the difference.

        Yeah I never put much weight in side by side comparisons to begin with anyway. They are often bias or you have to basically molest it with a looking glass to find the differences.
        And let's face it, fan boys never see the downsides anyway, they will always see their preferred console as being better.

        Though there have been some very surprising ones in the past, (BF4 not really being one of them)

    Looks slightly better on one system? Whoopdefuckingdo, its still far more complex and detailed than the current generation.

      Really? I watched a comparison of AC4 yesterday and all I could detect was more detailed water reflections and some extra bushes

        That's all you'll get. Current-gen renders are 480/560p. The whole "it's 10x more powerful!!" goes out the window when you actually start rendering at 1080p.

    It's the end of the world! The sky is falling!

    But seriously.. WTF?

    I remember on X360 seeing 1080p games and wondering why I couldn't get the same from the, supposedly better equipped, PS3.. now the situation has reversed but it's on "next gen consoles" where that kind of thing should be a given.. very odd.

      Did the 360 ever have the capability of 1080p native output? Im pretty sure it never had the guts.

        Correct. The UI isn't even 1080p. PS3 on the other hand, is. Same with Netflix for example.

      Neither console has ever had 1080p capability, except for a select few games, such as 2d arcade games and a couple HD remakes.

        'has ever had', 'except for a select few games'.

        Contradiction much?

          I don't really think it's a contradiction if you clearly admit the contradiction. I also don't believe 2D games and conversions of old games count, either.

            If you don't believe it counts then it is quite pointless to show you games that are native 1080p on current gen console since you will disregard them as "games I am not interested in".

            If you google for it you can see there are only a handful of games that is rendered in native 1080p but that is enough to show you that yes, current gen console have 1080p capability. Just not games you are interested in.

              It's got nothing to do with not being interested in those games. The point is that they are not very graphically intensive thus not very representative of the console's capability to render at that resolution. You're essentially saying "well, I'm impressed by the Xbox 360's 1080p render resolution" just because Hexic HD runs in 1080p. No 3D, triple-A title runs on it. When the majority of triple-A titles do, it would be a different story.

              They have 1080p "capability", yes. My old PC from 2005 can probably run Crysis on high setting at a handful of frames per second, but that doesn't mean it can "run Crysis". Do you understand what I'm saying? I'm not really impressed by games like Hexic HD being run in 1080p because it doesn't really prove anything from a technological point of view.

              Last edited 31/10/13 11:23 am

                I understand what you are saying but my point is that you claims that none of the console have 1080p capability.

                Neither console has ever had 1080p capability

                Which I have proven it to be wrong and you are saying just because they are not graphically intensive does not mean it is 1080p capable which is completely changing the point.

                Yes I know both console does not fully show their 1080p capability in most games but that does not mean it is not 1080p capable. Understand what I'm saying?

                They have 1080p "capability", yes. My old PC from 2005 can probably run Crysis on high setting at a handful of frames per second, but that doesn't mean it can "run Crysis". Do you understand what I'm saying? I'm not really impressed by games like Hexic HD being run in 1080p because it doesn't really prove anything from a technological point of view.

                Yes your old PC cannot "run Crysis" on smooth frame rate BUT your PC is capable of running it in 1080p just not feasible to play it on 1080p. Being not capable means it could not output 1080p in any way but you can.

                  Well then we obviously had different definitions in mind. I would agree with the idea that they have the capability, but not the feasibility, to run 1080p.

                Tekken 5 Dark Ressurection was rendered natively in 1080p on the PS3, however I believe the 360 version was scaled down too?

                Last edited 31/10/13 12:59 pm

            No it's still a contradiction. Saying that "Neither console has ever had 1080p capability, except for a select few games" makes no sense at all. That's like saying "This car has never had the capability to reach 150mph, except if you accelerate really hard".

              Yes, you're absolutely correct, but does anyone really care? I got my message across.

              Are you the same kind of person who throws a hissy fit when someone uses "literally" figuratively?

              Last edited 02/11/13 9:50 am

        You could force 1080p upscaling on the entire system with the ps3 by unticking all the other options in display settings. Had an absolutely awful frame rate though.

          Really? Is it actual, clear 1080p? I'd be very interested in trying this.

            i don't think that's true. some games capable of 1080 don't default to 1080 so you have to switch off the 720 to display them properly. i forgot to switch it back a couple of times and ended up with everything in 576.

            The option in question just meant that the console would upscale 720p or SD output from games to 1080p rather than your TV.

            If your TV had a particularly poor quality scaler, it could improve picture quality a bit. It wouldn't affect level of detail though.

          Can be done with xbox 360 too. I tried it before but the game delay increase and Gears of War became so hard to play lol.

          You can set the in xbox option to force render to 1080p.

        So the Assassin's Creed games, Dead Space 3 . Do they not count also?

          Neither of those games run in native 1080p on consoles.

            Dead space 3 and AC3 both run at 1080p on my ps3

              I can tell you for a fact they do not. You're either using a TV with a high-quality upscaler or you simply cannot tell the difference between 720p and 1080p.

                They sit on 1080 and on the rear of the cover the available displays are listed as 720p 1080i and 1080p.. I don't know how much more 1080p you can get then that...?

                  Because they upscale to those resolutions. They are 1080p in the sense that opening a 1280x720 image in Photoshop and making it 1920x1080 is 1080p. It is not native 1080p.

                  I can't believe you are actually convinced that they run in native 1080p. It is a well-known fact that they do not.

      360 upscales everything to 1080p

        Which basically means to make it compatible with 1080p monitors. It doesn't make it native 1080p, it still looks practically identical to 720p.

        If you play on a TV, this might be less apparent because good TVs have upscaling technology that can make 720p images look really very good.

          Upscaling presents too much input lag to do anything. You can't play games with this turned on.

    Awesome! We made it this far and nobody had to mention that Elite PC machines will have better graphics!... Oh wait. Damd.
    Bah! PLAY GAMEZ! rRRrRRragh! I don't get the wars, I am a game whore and play on every system... Except WiiU. Maybe one day...

      I'm just sitting here with my Wii U and PC. Playing games and not caring.

    OK, so we can take two things away from this:

    1) No-one's going to be able to tell, and probably won't care. Storm in a teacup.

    2) Discounting rumours from credible source with a history of accuracy JUST because they posted it on neogaf first is idiotic. No-one gives a shit that your feelings are hurt that it didn't come out of reddit first. Reddit is not The Internet.

    2.2) No-one who was stupid enough to groan about neogaf credibility will remember this the next time it happens. Again.

      Except neogaf were the ones who spread the rumour about the family sharing being a demo, even though they were told by MS themselves that it was not a demo. It took MS to say it again before the rumour was finally dismissed.

        2) Discounting rumours from credible source with a history of accuracy JUST because they posted it on neogaf first is idiotic. No-one gives a shit that your feelings are hurt that it didn't come out of reddit first. Reddit is not The Internet.
        Check the bolded emphasis. The point is the source. Neogaf is not a person. It is a place where people post things. Lots of people, some of whom are reliable, some of whom are not.

        To discount a reliable source because they're posting it on neogaf, and someone else unreliable ALSO posted something false on neogaf is about as stupid as saying that nothing that appears on the internet can ever be true because of how much shit on the internet has been proven to be untrue.

    I game on a projector 120" - big difference in games at native 1080. I can't buy into this now. I'm sorry MS, but my Xbox 1 pre-order is now in the bin.

      What do you expect with decades-old technology? I'd use that cancelled preorder to buy a modern TV, personally.

    We could argue the pros and cons all day, but in the end there is only one thing to be said....

    BF4 bitchez!


    So we have...

    PS4 = 1080p Native (1920x1080) & XBone = 720p (1280x720 Assumed)

    Whilst this has been a pretty big story, I am wondering when we will know what the other versions are pushing particularly the Wii U. When you look at the XBone res, you find that it is actually closer to current gen resolutions than the PS4.

    Black Ops 2 was 880x720 on the 360 and Wii U, The PS3 was dynamic and occasional hit anywhere between 880x720 & 832x624. It will be interesting to see any improvements have been made to the current gen version and of course the Wii U version.

    I think a bigger story will be if the Wii U version is comparable to the XBone version and could really highlight the fact that developer tools on the XBone are way behind and/or possibly more of a pain to develop for than the PS3.

    I like that people are more worried about the comparison between XB1 / PS4, and not just stepping back and looking at how utterly atrocious this is that in 2013, "next-generation" consoles can't even hit 1080p at 60fps when mid range PCs from 2 years ago were doing that at the same or higher graphic fidelity.

      Yep. Really don't care about any next-gen consoles. I've got a Wii U (picked up half price) for nintendo exclusives, and a PC for everything else.

    I really dislike how Kotaku buys into this. I understand it's important to inform people that there is a difference, but the reality is the comments quickly devolve into a whole load of fanboy bullshit.

      So where in these comments does the "fanboy bullshit" begin, oh mighty rider of the high-horse?

        If you read through there's a few. Not as many here as on US Kotaku, or IGN as others mentioned. All I'm saying is these articles rarely lead to any productive discussion. Particularly with how the article is titled and written.

        Also, it is a mighty tall steed, not a mere high-horse.

    Given the major leaps the 360 made from launch games to most recent games, it's safe to assume that while THIS game is only 720p, future games will probably be running at 1080p standard.

    Still, a funny misstep if you don't care for either console.

    WOW! not surprised at all. activision + microsoft = bad news. lower resolution = higher profits. at least we still have fair news sites like kotaku telling us this stuff. it really lets us gamers be the judge. SAY NO TO XBONE FOLKS.

    Good! Some of us prefer it this way.

    The graphics are too pretty on PS4, they burn out your retinas.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now