amok: I may be thick, and it may be too late, but I have no idea what you are actually saying here...

gooberking: BTW I do believe some basic LOD technology is more or less baked into graphic processing in general. Stuff like using lower resolution textures and lower poly meshes for items in the distance. It's been that way for a while because that just a part of managing the resources responsibly.

timppu: Ok now I am unsure if this discussion is about the games trying to autotune the game graphics for your particular machine's power (your CPU/GPU speed etc.) even on the fly, or if it is about those generic tricks to make 3D graphics more efficient _regardless of your hardware specs_ that you seem to talking about (like LOD for distant objects, or not calculating graphics that are not shown on the screen anyway, etc.). I thought it was about the former, but now reading the OP I am unsure.

I was talking about similar like e.g. the NVidia Experience thingie where it decides for you what kind of graphics settings you should use for each game in your particular machine. I prefer it doesn't try to decide it for me.

apehater: in case some retarded trolls post their shit on this thread, i'll ask the other participants to ignore them so the thread don't turn into shit. thanks.

apehater: as long as the publisher with support by or pressure by console manufacturer offer their games, which runs at 1080p resolution, according to the game box, although its using dynamic scaling with up to 1080p. if they would be open about that and inform their customers, then it would be alright. so they're scamming.

gooberking: I think he is saying something like "if" a company made a game that rendered at a resolution lower than 1080p, but then upresed the image to output at 1080p then it wouldn't really be a 1080p image, but they could say it was on the box.

I don't know that this has been known to happen. High quality upresing takes quite a bit of time too, and somebody would notice.

BrandeX: Will it "turn your thread to ship" if I point out that Rage was id Tech 5 engine, and Doom 3 was id Tech 4?

Fenixp: I already did and now I feel offended for being ignored.

Crosmando: It's certainly deceptive if the game cover/box on the shelf says "1080p" and it isn't 1080p at all times.

BrandeX: MIssed that line. There's a fair amount of text to skim through.

Crosmando: Upscaling is not true widescreen you moron, under that definition GOG could sell a DOSBox game with a 320x200 resolution upscaled to 1920x1080 and call it "widescreen" or "1080p".

apehater: although such threads tend to turn into ship here, i'll give it a try and see how it goes.

as far as i got it right, dynamic scaling is getting a new trend and heavily used in videogame industry since the current gen consoles xb1/ps4 release. its a feature that keeps a stable framerate in intensive gameplay moments of a game by dynamicaly lowering the graphics quality, more exact lowering resolution. so far i know this feature was used first in the game rage (2011 modified doom 3 engine) for whatever reasons. it had horrible impact on the game graphics for pc users, even if they had enough hardware power. who played the game back at the release surely can remember „ all the fun“.

i'm not an expert about dynamic scaling in detail and hope that users skilled and experienced in game graphics will provide more detailed infos about that topic and correct me, in case something isn't right with the content in this post.

now an example for better understanding. lets say a game company wants to release an fps on current gen consoles. its standart that it will be rendered at 1080p resolution and have a stable 30 fps framerate. due to very hardware demanding situations in combat scenes the fps drops to unplayable rates. so to make the game playable without dumping down the graphics (such as shadow quality, lighting, particle density, lod, …) and letting it look like a ps2 game, the devs just add a feature into the engine which scales the resolution of the game down to 720p so the game stays playable. i see 3 ways of how this works:

1. the full game pictures at the end get rendered at lower resolution.

2. the textures inside the game getting rendered at lower resolution, kinda dynamic lod for textures. full game pictures are still rendered at full resolution.

3. game objects with textures getting rendered at lower resolutions. full game pictures are still rendered at full resolution.

4. a mix of all 3 methods above.

since current multi platform games are already too demanding for ps4 and xb1, this feature gets heavily used. and according to a forum (can't remember which it was, more than a year ago), this feature is in almost every ps4 and xb1 game. there aren't much companies that admit that their games have dynamic scaling, for obvious reasons. for me its a scam, you play a game with promised game quality thats not there throughout the game. how do you see this?

also do i have to fear that this shit will start to infest pc games too? non-optional dynamic scaling on pc sounds terrifying for me.

in case some retarded trolls post their shit on this thread, i'll ask the other participants to ignore them so the thread don't turn into shit. thanks.