September 6th, 2011
Posted in 
Rendering Architect at DICE, Johan Andersson, has confirmed Battlefield 3′s native resolutions on consoles. You can view the Tweet below.
So there you have it folks, Battlefield 3 on both the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 will run at a native resolution of 1280 x 704. While not a huge step down from the desired 1280 x 720 HD resolution, it’s still a little odd to know that one of the most graphically hyped games of all time isn’t actually “HD”. Good thing the subtle loss in resolution will help with memory usage, keeping gameplay solid. So what are everyone’s thoughts on this? Let us know!
Source: Twitter
Tags: 
Whaaaatt not hd?
no problem, since 90% of LCDs, LEDs that claim to be 1080p are actually worse than sub hd, the 1080p lcds leds say it but in reality only has 1920×1080 (1080 lines) of static resolution which is only good for viewing photos and any static image, the resolution that really matters to the games resolution is dynamic (motion) resolution, dynamics and resolution of most LCDs, LEDs, and only 300 lines, 400 lines, which is much less resolution than 720p, 720p is 720 lines.
that’s a fact
Full HD plasma only has 1080 lines of resolution real dynamic, so if the guy is saying that disturb 1080p will play on PC and bla bla bla is pure bullshit because if he has lcd, led he is playing in super sub hd.
You are absolutely incorrect about resolutions, and I hope you do some research before posting misleading information. LCD and LED monitors are fixed pixel displays. There is no such thing as static and dynamic resolution with a fixed pixel display. 720p is 700 lines of resolution. 1080p is 1080 lines of resolution. You may be onto something when it comes to tube-based displays, but still what you are saying really doesn’t make any sense.
Well this is to be expected for the ps3 with it’s paultry 256mb of video RAM and pitiful GSX fillrates. Seeing how Dice is forced to develop with the lowest common denominator ps3 in mind. Unfortunately this means that the SUPERIOR Xbox 360 will get gimped as well. They should stop worrying about the overpriced internet ready blu ray player’s INFERIOR hardware and develop for the full potential of the Xbox 360′s SUPERIOR architecture.
Not HD :/ That hurts. Still native resolution is much higher than in other FPS like CoD.
how does it hurt. There’s going to be no blur and no scaleing they’ve already stated this. All they are doing is taking a 720p native image and then removing a millimeter from the top and bottom making it every so slightly more widescreen. Then they are leaving everything that way with no stretching at all. Just basically think of it as HD but very very slightly not fitting the size of your tv instead of sub-hd because thats really what its gonna look like.
I’d heard this before based on the trailer they released with ps3 footage in it at e3, but thought they might resolve this and get full 720p by release .
No huge deal, especially as it will help sustain performance . I wonder if it will be upscaled or if it will have a black bar top and bottom , as other games have done instead.
Maybe kz3 still is graphical king after all ( obviously its not got same level of destruction ), as it’s 720p res .
They already stated that this was the resolution for the PS3 a long time ago. And when they said it they also said that there would be no scaleing that there would only be a incredibly small black bar at the top and bottom. They wanted native 720p with no stretching.
Alright, I can live with that. In my opinion the very small bars (about 5mm at the top and 5mm at the bottom on a 40inch screen, I measured) are way better than scaleing!
eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-07-battlefield-3-fills-to-720p-on-console
This been confirmed too .
It wont even be 5 mm. It’s 8 pixels , and apparently will be covered by overscan basically.
Crisis over lol
Oh sh1t its Microsoft fault will say sony fantards LOL!
No, “$hitbox” inferior hardware capabilities is to blame for this whole generation of console games, looking subpar at best, when compared against the best of, PS3 exclusives…
and the 90% of multiplataform games? LOL! fail again!!!
That’s because, all “sh#&box” has is multiplats; Not to mention, the 0.01% graphical difference are only noticable when you come to websites like “these” to compare the “hairs-difference”… Trust me, dude; The graphical gap between PS3 and 3sh#*sty multiplat games is by far, no where near, the graphical leap and difference when comparing a PS3 exclusive (built from the ground up) to a 360 exclusive or any game built from the ground up on such an, inferior piece of hardware…
You got owned moneysha,if its superior why still get many inferior versions of games? And dont say that its because the developers cos the ps3 is old now LOOL.
And any of those look better than uncharted 2 and killzone 3? Hell dead island is better on the ps3 though call of juarez was worse. PS3 is better at open world games than the xbox first of all, and with killzone 3 and uncharted 2 the bar still hasn’t been raised yet. Hell even gears 3 raises the bar for graphics on the xbox.
Uncharted 3 and battlefield 3 on the ps3 will probably raise the bar on consoles again. If the ps3 is old why does uncharted 3 seem to best any console games, and how can battlefield 3 be the only game to have amazing destruction, lighting, while using mlaa raising the bar yet again? The hardware might be old yet developers are still squeezing out more from it.
@superloco23
The only reason why you and the rest of your 360 fan-tard buddies don’t like for PS3 owners to use the ol’ (developer’s talent) excuse is because, you know it to be the real reason behind so many shi&#y ports to PS3… It’s been proven, by many “talented” developers that PS3 is far more capable then “shitbox”, even with it’s split memory… 360 fan-nerds are just upset because, all their multiplatform games only look 0.01% better, yet, they can’t seem to get one game, that really sets itself apart, graphically, to prove “shitbox’s” thunder…
@SuperLoco23
I hope you die.
i love the superiority complex that ps3 fanboys have over xbox its like beating up on your retarded cousin. Too bad ps3 is crap compared to a high end PC.
That sucks, why cant we get full HD at 30 fps? They should have called the KZ3 team or who-ever. To me it seems the devolopers are just dumbfounded when it comes to consoles. Lets just hope the gameplay is solid.
Killzone 3 doesnt have destructible environments and other awesome features of Frostbite 2 the engine. Maybe you should look that up and learn how to make video games before saying that stuff.
Killzone 3 as well as Killzone 2 does have destructible invironments, and they are fully dynamic and physically correct.
The thing is Guerrilla are aliens as Naughty Dog are.
I wouldn’t say that Killzone 2 had destructible environments (can’t speak for KZ3 since I didn’t play it), but it’s closer to elements of the environment were destructible but no where near to the extent that recent Battlefield games have been/are showing and certainly not fully destructible.
You are right, but nonetheless they were there, and Killzone 2 is yet far better than CoD MW3.
memory problem? so its lagystation (256 mb) lack of memory problem LOL!
at least do some research before posting. PS3 has 512MB ram – 256 system ram and 256 video ram. Xbox has 512 video ram and 10MB of edram. So they are about the same idjut
@THETRUEHURTS: Boring troll =/
no… its not the “same” 256 is half 512. Its because of that ps3 dont have cross chat etc etc etc…
YOU need to do some research before posting… PS3 only have a good processor. The VGA is crap, the Operational System is crap and the ported games is crap… Even some exclusives like gran turismo 5 with mandatory install and laggy races is crap.
Its not a good processor,it has bandwith issues,and developers cant work properly on it and cost more.The new xbox slim has a better cpu,but microsoft limited the power of it.
An yes it cant handle crossgamechat cos the ram is pretty poor and the os is too shitty.
Same to music-ingame option,the ps3 cant go with the audio of the game and the audio of the music in the same time,and btw if you try to open the xmb while you are in a game is too slow compared to xbox guide.
And am not a fanboy,all here its the truth.
Yeah the gpu is a little better too cos the 10edram.
I just like good games,i have ps3 too and they games are good but not all the exclusives are good as the fanboys say.
BTW am not a xbox fanboy,i prefer zelda series wich are better than any ps3 and xbox game by far.
I just prefer the xbox because the games that i like the best are better on xbox and because the online experience is wayyyy better on xbox(am a social person lol) i love crossgamechat.
How do I English?
the vga is crap? i didnt know the ps3 had a vga port lmfao
@thetruthhurts
The XBOX 360 has total 512MB RAM but this is shared RAM with the systems resources. the PS3 has 256MB Dedicated RAM and can also access the 256MB system RAM.
When you buy a laptop or PC do you look for machines with Dedicated graphics cards or shared graphics cards for gaming?
The XMB could do with a revamp as it is a little stale but i still prefer it to Microsoft’s Ad ridden UI.
This cross chat which people still keep bringing up. From what other websites have been reporting the actual used system ram on the PS3 has decreased in recent months with improvements made with the XMB and removal of Linux so there now is enough RAM left to run a similar system to the Cross chat on the XBOX 360.
I am one of the fortunate ones to use both consoles and in my opinion the PS3 has the performance there its just tapping into that capability that has been a struggle. Luckily in recent months we have seen some developers really take advantage of the hardware and i think DICE will do the same.
As for the continual ‘LAG Station’ comment you keep bringing up on the comments system, it’s blatant you have no understanding or definition of the word as it doesn’t even form a proper insult.
You’re just $hittin your diaper because, despite, PS3′s split memory, your precious “$hitbox” still can’t out perform a (developed from the ground-up) PS3 game… Which is exactly why, “$hitbox” version of this game WILL BE the inferior version; Hell, DICE hasn’t even made any real efforts to show any glimps of “shitbox” footage… Your “$hitbox” can’t even handle this game on one freakin disc; But I guess that’s PS3′s fault, too, huh???
cool story bro bahahahaha
“You’re just $hittin your diaper”. Instant 5 stars..
Go to ign and look at their console war page where they compare the bandwidth of everything in both consoles. http://gear.ign.com/articles/111/1116182p1.html there ya go. Go down to the ram and see that the 256 XDR ram in the PS3 outperforms the Xbox ram by itself.
Who cares? Play games, not systems.
Yes butthurts do some research. The reason it can’t do x game chat is due to it’s os having larger footprint.
@TheTruthHurts
It’s not a memory problem. Dice probably wanted platform parity and because of the 360 can’t hold enough data on a single disc, they cut it for both the 360 and PS3.
Or did you forget about GT5 and how much better it looks compared to Forza 3, with 16 cars on track at the same time running 1080p, and keeping 60fps most of the time. I will agree Forza has better performance running almost continuous 60fps, but GT5 doesn’t run much worse and looks far better.
Oh btw. Enjoy the Dead Island win. It’s weird how good games get the PS3 win, while mostly cash ins get a 360 win. The truth hurts doesn’t it?
Removing 16 lines of resolution isn’t even news-worthy. The only reason this might become a big deal is because you’re reporting it like it’s news. Nobody will even be able to notice a difference between 720p and 704p. Anyone who says they can is wrong, unless they’re using something to pixel count.
in b4 ps3 fanboys blame xbox lmao
definitely pc on this game if I feel like I need it. and i must say i just discovered this site and love the content that goes up on it, but man, the things said in the comments are some of the most offensive & bias remarks I have ever read. Since when did arguing on the internet get anything done?
(don’t reply to this cause i’ll never read it
_)
I’ll wait for the review of this game on the consoles , if its good then its a buy if not then no buy simple as that.
The irony of 360 fanboys calling out PS3 fanboys when they are the ones currently making more noise about this so-called situation.
I’m not a fan of most up-scaling but 1280 by 704 is barely sub HD. I mean, it’s only 16 rows away from 720p. It’s so close to full 720p that I doubt anyone will notice or care. It’s not like Call of Duty, which is 960 by 544.
Speaking of the whole up-scaling discussion, I was dreading resistance 3 being a bit of a blurry mess (since it’s 960 by 720), but I was actually pleasantly surprised with the quality of its up-scaling. It was like Halo Reach, where I could barely tell that it was sub HD, and even though it was, it was a crisp, clean image. It wasn’t like Crysis 2 where it’s a blurry, horrendous mess. Kudos to Insomniac for getting the frame-buffer technique right.
as already been noted above, it’s still native 720 with tiny black bar that gets mainly covered by overscan apparently
Anyone who uses overscan obviously doesn’t care about resolution though.
They already stated a long time ago there will be no scaleing that the image was just going to have incredibly small black bars at the top and bottom so that everything was displayed natively. So its basically HD Since they just take a 720p image and black out a millimeter at the top and bottom.
704 or 720 i dont see HUGE difference anyway. The main selling point is still mp… I dont think many will stay still & just look at the graphics in awe & die an easy death
so yeah its good to go.
High Definition is just a euphemism for a set ratio of a high resolution of pixels. Its not exactly a holy grail, CRT computer monitors have been outputting 1280×1024 for just about a decade now and nobody was all giddy about HD back then, sometimes people get to wrapped up in marketing voodoo and not actually understanding whats going on technically. Its just visible binary bits truthfully. 1280×704 is very good, as SD is a magnitude lower compared to that ratio. It is very high resolution and at a very good resolution I should say. In my subjective opinion, high resolution isn’t really all what its cracked up to be. It is extremely nice to play at 2560×1600 on a pc monitor up close and personal. But actually playing some games at 1080p on pc with everything turned up, on a hd television is inconvenient. Black Ops (which runs like crap) really plays better at 720. When you sit back in your chair some distance away from your 40 inch and play at 1080p, its actually hard to play. It was never scaled for that high of resolutions, so things look very small
. You either have to sit very close, or turn down the resolution. I like sitting back on my bed, so for me the resolution goes down. Not all games are like this, but some are and especially if they are console ports. Something like The Witcher 2, scales very well at really high resolutions and looks amazing.
It doesn’t need to be HD for the graphics to look good. That’s like saying that Metal Gear, God of War, etc, etc, collections look better than their PS2 counterparts because they’re upscaled. Marginally, yes because they’re clearer, and widescreen, yes, but far better? No.
FF13, garbage game btw, is sub hd on the 360 but man if the game doesn’t look absoutely amazing no matter what system you’re viewing it on. It’s a PS3 win, but that’s another game I wouldn’t have cared if it was a loss.
Speaking of FF13. Vanille is amazingly hot for a video game character. Not only that, but has some amazing looking females cosplay her all the time. Look it up. It’s like O_O. That’s all.
gonna wait for the H2H and review before I decide
What? 8 pixels off the top and bottom of the screen?
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE! HOW CAN I POSSIBLY BE EXPECTED TO SUFFER THROUGH THIS TORMENT!? DAMN YOU DICE, DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!
wow I dind’t know 8*1280 equaled 8. they’re not removing only 16 pixels; they’re removing 16 lines of 1280 pixels each. get your math and logic straight.
According to Eurogamer it will still be 720p but the lines at the top and bottom are black so no upsacling and the black lines won’t be visible on a lots of TV’s overscan area.
well let’s hope there is no screen tearing!
anyway i can’t wait for both battlefield3 and Mw3.
It’s gonna be an awesome winter!
consololol @ less than 720p and 30fps
Wow! A Pc EliteFanboy on a console comparison/news website. Keep trolling bro, no one will give a crap abowt you bragging your expesive crap out.
Honestly, I buy the majority of my games on console. I’m only messing about. BF3 will still be a fun game regardless.
This is a PC game boys.
I hope you saved your penny’s because I didn’t. I have been spending it on great 360 and PS3 titles.
I own a Xbox and a Ps3. I’m getting this on PS3 his year. This game makes me want to build a rig. My laptop is getting old…….The only game I can max is WOW LOL. Question for my PC friends? AMD or Intel? Nvidia or ATI? 6gb ddr3 enough? What should I focus on? All I want to do with the thing is play games and browse the internet. That’s it. Idk. I need money. LOL
Intel i7 2600k if you’re rich or i5 if you want a little less power. nvidia gtx580 is wonderful.
I was honestly looking at I5′s. I understand how these chips work, but for gaming is it a huge huge difference? Between the I7 I mean. Cause I’m the kind of guy that would rather pay for something now, so I dont have to upgrade every year. I’d like it to last 3? Hardware wise. Idk. I’m perplexed.
At the moment no, and I5 2500k is fine, if games make use of hyperthreading in the future then I6 2600k will be significantly better.
Your choice of GPU will make a much larger difference,
For a budget, go ATI, for power, go Nvidia. The GTX 580 ($450-$500 per card) is easily one of the most powerful cards on the market, but you can get more power out of just running two HD 6850s ($150 per card) in crossfire. That and just one HD 6790 ($350) is about the same give or take as a GTX 580.
At the moment, I have dual HD 6870′s and that runs anything like a dream. I would buy Nvidia if I had a bunch of extra money to throw around and didn’t have to build on a budget.
WOW! Look at all those fanboys! Really stupid posts. And again i see all this crap abowt the ps3′s 258mb story. Ok let me explain it for you because i see your more cropped in the head more then usual. Both have the same amount of memory:
xbox360 gpu
Up to 512MB 700Mhz GDDR3
ps3 gpu
256MB 700Mhz GDDR3 Dedicated Ram
256MB 3.2Ghz XDR Ram (to use)
Both shared with the main system RAM. So they have the same system GPU memory. If the ps3 had only 256mg of video ram then games like GOW3 and U2 whould look a bit more crappy. 1280 x 704 Is realy not that bad but i can see why they did it. I mean look at the 2.0 engine! Crazy as hell! I’m surprised it wasn’t 6oop or lower. The good thing is the ”1280” witch most games on consoles don’t have. 720 vs 704 is not that huge of a thing. I would like better fps then resolution. So if 720p is sacrificed for better smooth gameplay then fine with me.Just stupid people acting like its a big deal so they can act like fanboys and blame the other system.Love how the 360 fanboys bring the hole crossgamechat thing again as an excuse to bash on the ps3.
And @thetruehurts sir plese stop make yourself look like a complete jackass its really getting old.
Actually about the memory thing…you have it a bit wrong.
360 has 512MB of Unified RAM + 10MB Edram to store the framebuffer (unless tiling is used). So developers pick how to split the memory between the video and main ram. 360 OS + cross game chat takes up 32MB so 512 less 32 = 480MB to the developer. Most developers utilise the 10MB of Edram so no need to use the system memory for the framebuffer.
PS3 has a split memory architecture which is no bad thing but when you only have 256 + 256 it becomes problematic. So it has 256MB of Video RAM + 256MB of super fast but expensive main RAM from Rambus. If Sony stuck with GDDR3 RAM all the way they might have had a further 256MB of main RAM instead like on the PS Vita. But the XDR is fast at streaming textures. Anyhow now deduct the 50 MB OS footprint (used to be 96MB!) of which 7MB is used on the VRAM and 43MB on the RAM. That leaves developers with 249MB of VRAM and 213MB of RAM. Now deduct the framebuffer from the VRAM- this depends on the game of course. I think on Killzone 2 it was something like 36MB!
Now do you see why developers have issues with the PS3 memory? However the PS3 isn’t designed to be exactly programmed like a PC (which the 360 is). It does after all have the Cell processor with it’s multiple SPU’s to carry out tasks traditionally reserved for the GPU and blu ray space for storing large amounts of uncompressed textures which means the GPU doesn’t need to do any decompressing. The blu ray can of course hold 1080p video and LPCM sound as well.
Bottom line is the reason why the top tier PS3 exclusives look so good on the textures front is because the Cell can help with the texture streaming from the HDD and blu ray to the VRAM freeing up precious memory to store higher quality textures. The comparatively weak GPU can be doing other things, basically the CPU is in effect increasing the power of the RSX by taking away a lot of it’s workload so there is a lot more GPU juice left. All this does require really good engine tools and years of hardwork and large budgets.
And thats why developers don’t waste their time doing something good for the ps3 because makeing a game for the xbox is easy as pie.
HHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!! i whant this game, torture and torture….BBBBUUUUUAAAAAA!!!!
This article is very missleading. As the resolution defacit is actually removed pixels ie black boarders the actual displayed resolution on a per pixel basis is the same as 720p. so quit bitching.
What’s funny is that in the 30fps Battlefield 3 article on this website, I mentioned some sacrifices would have to be made in order to have BF3 on consoles. 30FPS was something I didn’t mind and I also mentioned that sub-hd might happen. I’m fine with the sacrifice as most games look just fine at sub-HD, love Alan Wake and Crysis 2 on consoles.
I smell another crysis 2 going on here;}”and sub hd on ps3?give us a break”But still looks more fun than crysis 2′well lets hope anyway.
dang, cant we all just get along!?! Why do you have to be one side or the other? I have both Xbox 360 and ps3, I play both. Sure I use my ps3 more because of the Bluray but overall, both systems have great games, great graphics and look a hell of a lot better than anything Nintendo has EVER put out. So just calm down, drink a beer, and play some video games. It doesn’t matter what system you have, it just matters that you are playing…and having fun.
If you feel that strongly about one system VS the other, you might need another hobby like sports! Go watch some sports with all the other sports douche-tards and leave us nerds to the video games. Sweet Monkey Jesus!!! All this anger over which system is better is just freaking stupid.
I couldn’t agree more. Some of these guys go on as if, it makes them the best by having either of the 2 consoles and if one platform wins the multiplat graphic comparison, they are superior beings.
If you want to be the best and have the right to boast, go participate in a sport.
The producers have knuckled to Modern Warfare and have gone cheap and lazy. Lets just have stick men with broom handles and say it will play good if one takes all the brightness down and lower the contrast. We’ll still have color. Nice improvement. Not!
I’ve been visiting this site for a very long time now, because:
1. It really helps me decide which game is the better version of the
2 when it comes to multiplats.
2. The news articles that are posted on here are most of the time on
games that I’m really interested in.
3. The reviews that are given is done in a non-biased way and not
some fault finding mission, pointing out what should have been
in the game, instead of telling us how the game is.
This is truly a great site and a site that I visit almost each. I rarely go to sites like IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer, 1UP, Gamespy, etc. I find that these guys are mostly hypocrites and bought into the politics of gaming in some way or another.
But I do find something wrong with Lens of Truth and that is the community… I never felt the need to take part in these pointless console wars as I’m not a fanboy and own both consoles, but I’m getting fed up with the shameless factless disrespectful comments that are being made by these “Trolls”.
I for one, think this site can be the best site out there because these guys that run this are true gamers and understand that it’s about the games.
Guys come on… I urge you, let’s make this a great community where we can have intelligent debates regarding gaming and not some fanboy war site (which there are many of). This is a unique site and should remain as one.
Signature:
Xbox 360 Elite + 2 Controllers + 70 games
PS3 320 GB + 2 controllers + PS Eye + PS Move + PS Navigator + PS Sharpshooter + 31 games
Sony 1510 RMS 6.2 Surround Sound System
Samsung 46″ FullHD 3D LED SmartTV + 4 Bluetooth 3D Active Glasses
“At the end of the day, it’s not about the consoles, it’s about the games and fun factor they provide”