FFXV Episode Duscae Runs At 900p On PS4; XBO Screenshots Reveal Sub-800p Resolution – Report

ffxv-xbo (2)

Final Fantasy XV Episode Duscae is currently out in North America for the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. This early access demo is only available with day 1 edition of Final Fantasy Type-0 HD.

Final Fantasy XV director Hajime Tabata has already confirmed that the demo won’t run at native 1080p resolution on the PS4 and Xbox One. He explained that while the demo will miss out on 1080p resolution, this is their target for the final version of the game. Considering the fact that the game is still in development on an engine that is still not finished, this result shouldn’t be surprising. It is clear from the demo that Episode Duscae release was targeting a strict deadline and as a result, optimizations aren’t just as good as a retail release. The frame rate has issues and can drop during effect heavy scenes. There is lack of AF resulting in blurred textures over distance.

A curious look at some of the direct-feed screenshots of Final Fantasy XV Episode Duscae for the PS4 reveals a native 900p resolution, as can be seen in the image below. The talented folks over at Beyond3D, who are known for their accurate pixel counting, also confirm a resolution of 900p for the PS4 version of the game.

ffxv-ps4-pixelcount

Thanks to NeoGAF user oO_Arekkz_Oo, we have out first look at direct-feed screenshots from the Xbox One version as well. Pixel counting these screens reveals a sub-800p but equal or above 720p resolution for the Xbox One version of the game.

This is rather disappointing to see since both version of the game suffer from performance issues in addition to the hit to the Image Quality.

Let us know what you think about Episode Duscae in the comments below.

  • Huub Hermans

    So dissapointed with this consoles on the pc they are running 4k games 40-60FPS ps4 and xbox 900-800p 30fps 🙁 Not happy with this.

  • Anonymous

    the game won’t be out for another Three Years

  • Universe

    Not even 1080p can save the visuals of FFXV. Character models apart, the game looks worse than Skyrim. F’ing Skyrim! At least the animations are top notch, really impressive stuff.

  • Dante199020

    Just watched a comparison video. This looks like crap on Xbox One.

  • next gen 720 ok

  • Lemondish

    A demo for a game that’s a year and a half from release is unoptimized? Shocker.

  • JRCBR

    lmao !!!! this generation amuses me…. its the sub HD generation 🙂 each day more and more donwgrades…. now the PS4 join the party and is on 900p….

  • benbenkr

    Let’s be honest, many of you bought FF Type-0 HD for XV demo. You’ve been suckered into Squeenix marketing.

  • ImOnaDrugCalledSheen

    Better quality on PS4 we all already know this, nothing new here, move along.

  • Guest

    That’s weak and the X1 is even weaker. Dumb and Dumber.

  • Guest

    900p and sub-800 (read 720p) with no texture filtering and unstable framerates. Welcome to next gen people. Enjoy, your impressive sh*t.

  • Guest

    Wow, the floor is horrendous. Wow! if only the PS4 version has that bad of texture filtering problem and not the X1. I will be pissed. Its supposed to be more powerful and not being able to do AF is not a sign of strength!

  • corvusmd

    All these screens are proving is that anyone still tied up in Res numbers is missing the point. The game looks fantastic.

    • Jecht_Sin

      That’s because those are the 900p screenshots from PS4. Not optimal but for a demo with an unfinished engine is acceptable. Now check the 720p images on XBone.. 😀

  • EX+

    A demo for a game a year away.
    No offense, but when you say rumor. Tabata mentioned no numbers. I’ll wait for digital foundry.

  • Vallen

    No surprise really, 900p is still alright — good effort. If they reach 1080p for the PS4 on the final game then I will respect them.

    • EX+

      It’s Square Enix Japan. Masterful with graphics. 1080p is almost a given. This demo isn’t optimised much.

      • angh

        they made ff13 on ps3 at 1080p. But the ‘equality’ came later and ff13-2 was in same resolution as in x360. Which really impacted the experience, especially when I put ff13-2 disc same day i finished 13…

        • Mike

          Both FFXIII and XIII-2 ran at 720p on PS3. Digital Foundry confirmed this.

          • corvusmd

            Ouch…that proved that the res debate is pointless and just what fanboys WANT to see.

          • Guest

            What stupid bs are you saying? Res matters, just because the pathetically weak X1 struggles to do it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter. You know what’s even more pointless? Your argument.

          • Jamie Lawler

            Guest opinions dont count,no matter how misguided they are.

          • Up-res’d if I remember right. 720p native but 1080p scaled.

        • Vault101

          Mike is right. As a matter of fact I can’t think of a single retail game from last-gen that exceeded 720p.

          • Guest

            GT5, GT6, GT prologue, Wipeout and more. Look it up. Even the 360 had a few 1080p games.

          • Vault101

            I’m not sure if GT ran in native 1080p. I think it may have been upscaled?

          • Guest

            That’s not what you said, you said that you don’t think that any game ran higher than 720p and those games prove otherwise. I didn’t say they were 1920×1080. And btw, Wipeout does it 1920×1080. Ridge Racer 7 was 1920×1080 60fps on the PS3. There were quite a few.

          • Vault101

            Didn’t realize this was a pissing contest. I do apologize if I somehow offended you.

          • angh

            Gran Turismo. And maybe resolution wasn’t 1080 in ff13, but on ps3 difference was quite big in favor of ff13. ff13-2 wa simply more granulated, less sharp overall.

          • Vault101

            Good call. Forgot about GT.

            FFXIII looked pretty amazing back then. I’m guessing that XIII-2 didn’t have the same budget.

      • hydzior

        Yeah it’ll look worse (now the looks are nothing special) but hope it’ll run 1080p.

        • EX+

          No, it’s not going to look worse. It’s going from Luminous 1.5 to 2.0. And it’s releasing sometime next year. That means at least one major SDK update for both consoles and a load of time for optimisation.
          Sony and MS are also both helping optimise the game for their respective consoles and both versions are being optimised separately. Unlike most games.

      • Guest

        Oh please Square Enix sucks and cant code for ish. This game will be 900p at best on PS4 and we’ll be lucky if the texture filtering (AF) and framerate is fixed. Even if they better the framerate, it’ll still be a inconsistence framerate. Weak! These systems aren’t getting better, they are getting worst.

        • EX+

          You’re either trolling or delusional.

          • Primus

            He has a point. Apparently the game barely got any work done because of the demo. What’s the target release date, late 2016? Early 2017. That’s not much time finish the game and optimize with a project of this scale.

            The Steam ports were shitty enough. Luckily FFXV is SE’s baby, so they’ll put their max effort. But will it be enough?

          • EX+

            It doesn’t seem like you understand the circumstances.
            They’re getting other companies to help. They’re getting both Sony and Microsoft to help with optimising the game. Developers can do a lot in one year.

          • Primus

            I don’t think you understand how game development works if you think it’s easy as just getting some programmers working on the project.

            Ubisoft had Unity running at 6fps on Consoles in the the beginning of 2014, and even with having a team much larger than Square Enix and having a lot more money than Square Enix, Ubisoft still couldn’t get stable 30fps by November.

            The developers for Witcher delayed their release date from Fall 2014, February 2015, to May 2015. Essentially they delayed their completed game for 3/4 of a year JUST for optimization and debugging more than they had already had done up to that point.

            The FFXV demo removed lots of the stuff that is happening in the Duscae region, yet it still ran rather poorly. Performance is not too much of an issue as of now, because we know that they are still finalizing Luminous, but it makes you wonder the Consoles can even handle this game at actuality? You say the demo isn’t optimized much, but it was said that XV was at 55% last September. In February they said 60% – citing that the demo took quite a bit of focus.

            Since we know the game is functionable and is playable on the Developer’s build due to TGS trailer, we can assume that the majority of the demo’s development time was taken in optimization.

            FFXV still has lots of development left, not even talking about optimization. This rest of this year is probably going to spent actually finishing this game, after than they’ll worry about optimization. Many areas in the game still haven’t been started yet, and they still have to finalize a bunch of textures.

            Have you seen how amazing the textures in the demo are?These work of art takes time, and we know that lots of the areas still need work to happen.

            If Square Enix want’s this game out before 2017, then they will only have about/ a little less than a year to debug/optimize. So it makes one wonder if Square can get XV to meet their optimization goals when other AAA developers couldn’t meet theirs on the same timeframe?

            Even if they succeed, FFXV looks to be a Fall/Winter release. 2016

          • EX+

            I don’t entirely disagree with any of this. The only thing I’m opposed to is the idea that Unity was running at 60fps on consoles in 2014 E3. They really didn’t. They were targeting 1080p.

            But trust me, this game will be fine and stable.

            I understand and even agree with your statements comparing Ubisoft And Square’s circumstances, but there’s just one problem… Ubisoft isn’t good at making stable, polished games. Lol and that’s not a slight on your post by the way.

          • Primus

            6 fps not 60. The devs said it themselves.

          • Anonymous

            why are you bring up steam on a console exclusive

    • Guest

      That’s not the point, the point isn’t whether Vallen is ok with 900p or not, its the fact that its 900p with NO TEXTURE FILTERING AT ALL, and crappy framerates. This seems to be a reoccurring theme with these system no. So soon, they are getting worst.

  • Edonus

    Okay…….. He does realize this is a demo right.they even said the engine isn’t done yet.

    Gaming media has really hurt this generation….. It has not educated the consumers and have turned something as complex as creating video game to a pixel count.

  • Joshua Pirog

    Gotta love a good biased article that bashes the performance of a DEMO. This site obviously favors PC.

    • popo123

      Yeah, it boggles the mind how so many people are ignorant(Btw not talking about the author here in gearnuke but many comments found in various sites and in Youtube and even in that Beyond3d forum). They’re treating this DEMO like it’s the final version of the game and is actually THE full Final Fantasy XV game. I cannot wait for this game to be released and just shove it to their faces how clueless and wrong they are.

  • Guest

    “Such next gen”
    WEAKNESS AWAITS!

    • popo123

      The demo is from an older build of the game and was even developed separately from the full version. Meaning they took a small part of the old version of the game and made it playable just for the demo. It’s even using a old version of the Luminous engine, version 1.5 while the final one is at version 2.

      Also stop using his tweet as a very irrelevant excuse. His tweets still ring true. Did he say “words you’re going to hear ALL THE TIME” ? No, he said “a lot.”

      • hydzior

        Demos are always developed separately.

        • popo123

          In this case the demo uses an older engine and the full game is being developed in conjunction with the latest engine they are also developing at the same time. However since they needed to rush this demo in time for Type-0’s release they halted the development of both the engine and the full game to make this demo playable.

    • Tha Truth

      And the scummy, last – gen, Xbox DONE pauper console is running in an even lower resolution than the PS4 (AGAIN) so how “weak” does that make your precious Xbone you ignorant little mongrel?

      Gotta pity the low – IQ morons who fell for the lies, overhype and underdeliver of Microsoft’s peasant 720p machine. 720p @ 30 fps? LMAO, no wonder the Poverty Box is flopping at the bottom of the sales charts and being abandoned by retailers all over the world. A peasant console reserved only for the lowest failures of society.

      • Reality Modeler

        Man, your intelligence is “fLAMER”… think about that.

      • Reality Modeler

        Man, your intelligence is “fLAMER”… think about that.

      • StigmaTosis

        Yeah because 900p 30 fps is so much better, how’s that 1080p Battlefield Hardline? Oh yeah it doesn’t exist. Weather you argue for PS4 or Xbox One, you still end up with an underpowered piece of crap, the only difference is Xbox Live doesn’t get hacked and go down every other day like PSN does, probably because Microsoft can afford to hire qualified network engineers and technicians while Sony has a bunch of monkeys in their IT Department.

    • ImOnaDrugCalledSheen

      Well if 900p is weak, whats that make sub 800 exactly?

  • corvusmd

    …and if that’s the case, once again it won’t matter. This gen has easily shown that in the world of gaming, resolution provides the smallest difference in graphics among console games. Even 720p vs 1080p games typically have to be freeze-framed and the differences pointed out. Videogames aren’t like real life and as the resolutions get higher and more re-fined, they noticeable differences get less and less.

    • such.wow

      What? No, 720p is blurry and easy to tell the difference between that and 1080p native.

      • corvusmd

        That’s what you WISH to believe….Can you tell? Sure, but it’s never a big deal, esp if one is up-scaled…and usually you have to be told which is which, and it has to be a still-frame. Resolution should be the very last factor someone takes into consideration this gen. Nearly every other aspect of gaming is MUCH more important.

        • such.wow

          I have a 1080p screen, I don’t want 720p blurry upscaled mess on it.

          • Brianck

            Will you stop saying that 720p is blurry. If 720p looks blurry on your screen then its a problem with your screen.

          • such.wow

            But it IS blurry when upscaled on a full HD TV, if you can’t see that, then you have a HD-Ready TV, or you need glasses.

          • Lemondish

            720p IS blurry.

            And if size of the screen is now a ‘problem’, then I’ve seriously missed out of several stages of deluded fanboy drivel if we’ve gone that far off the deep end.

        • Indy Sigur

          as bigger the screen as more visible it is. If you game on 32inches then perhaps you cant tell the difference. Those with larger screens or even projectors this is a pain tbh. Anything below 900p on screen 50in + does look very poor.

          • corvusmd

            I have a 65″ Samsung LED 240hz ….there is no major difference at all, and definitely not enough to make one version superior to the other. If you look for it you’ll find differences, but if you aren’t you won’t know, and if they weren’t side by side, you couldn’t tell which was which.

            There are far more important things regarding gaming than Res….res is at the bottom of a LONG list of important things

        • Lemondish

          I can always tell when something is not native resolution on my 1080p display. I’m not sure why you can’t, but what you think is normal isn’t.

          • og_dinkis

            They’re both going to be under 1080p so if you want it 1080p get it on pc. The game looks great ether way so idc what system I play it on

          • Vault101

            Except I don’t believe that a PC version has yet to be confirmed, although there are hints that it is in the works. Just nothing official.

      • Reality Modeler

        I think everyone would agree that it is easy to tell 720P from 1080P when sitting in front of monitors though it is much less noticeable at normal TV viewing distances. You’d have to be sitting 2-4 feet from a 50″+ TV to have a similar perspective to sitting in front of a monitor, and people generally sit at least 2-3 times further away from TVs than that… sometimes more depending on the placement of their couch that often has a coffee table in front of that, etc.

    • angh

      that’s a joke. check youtube video for ff13 on ps3 and ff13-2 on ps3. full screen and 1080p (and not on a phone).

      • corvusmd

        720p on last gen isn’t the same as 720p current gen…you’re doing more to prove my point.

        • Vault101

          Wait, what? 720p is the same now as it was for last gen. It refers to the amount of pixels on screen. As long as it is native and not upscaled, anyway.

          • corvusmd

            I get that technically 720p is the same, but I’m saying the quality of graphics of a last gen 720p game doesn’t touch a current gen one There is NO WAY that you’d confuse a last gen game at 720p to one from this gen….night and day difference…proving that other aspects of graphics are much more important than simple resolution.

          • Vault101

            That’s definitely true. Just because a game is running at 1080p and 60fps does not mean it looks great. Sharers, texture mapping, AF and the engine in general have a lot more to do with it overall. However, if all of those variables remain the same and you have a higher resolution, it is still pretty easy to pick out which one looks better. Last-gen did some amazing things with 720p, but I think it is probably time to move away from that because it is decidedly obsolete, even by console standards.

          • Arcendus

            Lol rather than angh proving your point, I think you’re wonderfully killing your credibility with this one.

          • og_dinkis

            I think he’s talking about more fidelity this gen @720 this vs last Gen

        • such.wow

          720p is 720p, I have no idea what you are talking about, and it seems neither do you.

        • angh

          720p this gen isn’t the same as 1080p this gen. And there is nothing that could prove your point. Twice as many information on 1080p is simply visible and increases image quality. In same way like 4k is better than 1080p (4 time the pixel density). Go to best buy and check it yourself.

    • Guest

      More of this stupid, weak and pathetic fanboy argument. Listen moron, just cuz you wanna believe this sh*t, doesn’t mean its true. I swear you fanboys have deluded yourselves to feel better about your even more pathetic system.
      You can easily tell the difference in real life, even on a small screen. The problem is telling the difference on these internet comparison shots and videos with their lousy compression. But MS fanboys have disingenuously latched on to this narrative and tried to convince the rest of the ignorant masses (mainly other MS fanboys) that its true. yet they can easily notice every little difference the X1 has when they think its a advantage. You people are fake and phony.

    • Swordslash

      I would actually say it depends on the size of your screen. Seeing a 480p video on a 40 inch TV would feel blurry AF but try to watch that video on a small smartphone and that 480p video will feel very sharp.

      I have a 32 inch LED HD TV so I’m not too crazy with the differences..

      • corvusmd

        I agree that TV size has something to do with it…however individual TVs actually make more of a difference than the consoles themselves…that’s why I feel the minor differences we have seen so far this gen are a wash, and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

        I have all the gen 8 consoles and a Samsung LED 65″ 240hz TV. There have been times where if I looked hard and paused I noticed a game looking ever so slightly better on PS4 than X1 (but never enough to make me want to use a controller I like less, a network I like less, and a UI that does less). My brother has a 60″ Samsung LED 120hz TV, and he brought it over so that we could do the visual tests ourselves. On my TV in 720p (upscalled)vs 1080p games from 4 ft away we were able to see PS4 look slightly better, but then simply putting the PS4 onto my brother’s TV made the X1 version look better. (My guess is that the better refresh rate on my TV made the images more sharp and clear).

    • Arcendus

      If this is your experience, please get your eyes checked. Seriously.