Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes runs at 1080p on PlayStation 4 and 720p on Xbox One, both at 60 fps
posted on 02.17.14 at 02:24 AM EDT by (@salromano)
Konami releases comparison shots on game's official website.

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes will run at 60 frames per second in 1080p on PlayStation 4, and 60 frames in 720p on Xbox One, Konami confirmed.

The PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions will both run at 30 frames per second in 720p scaled resolution.

Screenshots released on the game’s official website compare the previous generation versions to the current generation. A comparison video is coming soon.

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes is due out for PlayStation 4, Xbox One, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360 on March 18 in North America and March 20 in Europe.

Night Mission

PlayStation 3 vs. PlayStation 4

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 3 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 4

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 3 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 4

Xbox 360 vs. Xbox One

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox 360 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox One

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox 360 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox One

Day Mission

PlayStation 3 vs. PlayStation 4

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 3 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 4

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 3 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - PlayStation 4

Xbox 360 vs. Xbox One

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox 360 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox One

Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox 360 Meal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes - Xbox One

Play-Asia
  • Ryu Shikimori

    10 points to Sony

  • http://kougeru.tumblr.com/ Kougeru

    Hm..not as big a difference as I would’ve hoped/expected out of next-gen. Another ONE bites the dust for XBOX. Really not looking good for them being outperformed and/or out-visualed in every multiplat game so far. This game looks pretty near identical for ONE and 4 , that 720p and 1080p is a massive difference to my eyes. More disappointed in how little difference there is with the 360/PS3 vs Current Gen.

    • EX+

      Did you hear? Thief is 1080p 30fps on PS4 and 900p 30fps on the XBO, as DarthBrian posted.

  • icup ✔️

    oh lawdy. the pixels are beauuutiful.

  • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

    Looks fine on PS3, as expected, so I’ll be fine with it.

  • Nate

    That’s a shame about the One version. But does not matter to me. I’m planning on boycotting since the Hayter mishap.

    • crimsonidol

      Good luck, lone wolf.
      I guess there won’t be that many people who will boycott this game.

    • Pyrofrost

      Yeah, I’m really disappointed by the lack of Hayter as well. I do want to experience the story though, so I’m just going to wait for a used or discounted “complete” version, with Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain together.

      • Bobby Jennings

        Yeah, likewise.

    • tokyobassist

      This is how I imagined Xbox fanboys reacted to this article:

      http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j225/SCSnare/gifs/oprah02.gif

      Not speaking like it’s a fact but maybe it isn’t too farfetched to think the extra $100 for the X1 goes towards Kinect and TV lol.

  • crimsonidol

    For me personally, the differences are so marginal, that I really wouldn’t care for the “power of PS4/X1″. Even when the text on the signs is kinda blurry, I don’t care that much for playing a game on last gen.

    • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

      I could tell there was more detail put into the lighting, ground texture, and rain on PS4, but I’d be crazy to complain about the graphics it has on PS3 since it still looks pretty nice.

  • PrinceHeir

    PS4 is the best version, but i’ll wait for it to be included on a complete package with Phantom Pain in the future.

    so i’ll stick with the PS3 version for now

  • KingKellogg The Waffle Haggler

    I just want MGO3 and a full MGSV,not it split in two

  • bloodiOS

    Made some GIFs using 1080p images. In term of clarity, the PS4 version blows the PS3 counterpart out of the water:

    http://a.pomf.se/zmfppt.gifhttp://a.pomf.se/xktkgz.gif

    • Budgiecat

      Why the PS3 version has clouds and the PS4 don’t?

      • bloodiOS

        I don’t know. Maybe they’re dynamic and constantly moving, and this shot was just captured when there isn’t any there?

  • EX+

    Impressive for the PS4 version. I expected it to be 1080p, but not 60fps.
    However, I’m still gonna wait for the Phantom Pain. I’m not into this for now.

    • bloodiOS

      I’m pretty sure Kojima said very early on that the game is going to be 60fps on 8th-gen consoles. People were fully expecting 1080p@60fps on both the XBO and PS4 because it is a cross-gen title. Well, at least they nailed the 60fps in the end.

  • Bob Obb

    lol

  • shogunknight

    Well, i guess the difference is going to be a norm between those two consoles (aside from fighting games and indie titles). Damn, That is one great looking game

  • tokyobassist

    There is a clear (no pun intended) difference between next gen and current gen but not enough to make me go “I need to spend $440 RIGHT NOW!”. It looks nice on next gen but looks pretty good on current. Then again GTA V had some crazy ass graphics so I shouldn’t be surprised to see this level of detail late in the PS360 life span.

    Also I can’t wait to see the comments about how “Resolution and frame-rate doesn’t matter” now that the shoe is on the other foot.

    • MrRobbyM

      GTA V looked good but the resolution was poor with frame rate drops when things got a little busy. I sure do hope they’re doing a PS4 version.

    • Elvick

      Last gen games that look great have a multitude of sacrifices to look that good. Like a lot of them being sub-res, or just having shitty framerates.

      Solid performance is what you should be spending that $440 on. Because the performance WILL be better on current generation hardware.

      • tokyobassist

        Stability is the buzzword. If the PS4 is consistently doing 60fps without much hiccups for these multiplats then I would have to say 30fps on current gen is miles inferior and wouldn’t be as debatable. I think framerate is something people never really thought much about until they started making it such a big deal recently.

        FPS to me is about how the game plays and feels. 30fps isn’t bad by ANY stretch. I play a lot of games at 30fps and some preferably so but majority of the time people can’t argue the benefits of 60fps. It’s the same day and night difference between SD and HD.

        • Elvick

          I didn’t say 30FPS is bad.

          30FPS with consistent drops is however. Especially when they already run games with sub-native resolutions, and other sacrifices to fit run on ancient hardware.

          FPS isn’t the only thing that makes current gen different.

          Remove enough and you can run things on Vita too. Doesn’t mean it’s on par with PS4.

          • tokyobassist

            I never thought you implied that. I think that got lost in internet translation.

            I get where you’re coming from though.

  • DarthBrian
    • EX+

      Oh no.
      Thief? Really? Lol.

    • EX+
      • karmacoma

        Witcher 3, 900p/30fps on PS4? That’s a little disappointing. I expected at least the PS4 version to be 1080p/30fps or 60fps if the resolution was lowered.

        Although I get that it’s an open world game not targeting last gen consoles, unlike MGS, AC and WD. Still…

        • EX+

          It says working to get 1080p.
          I think I’d be in a safe bet if I said come launch day, it’d be 1080p on the PS4. But for now, yes, it’s disappointing.

    • rurifan

      30fps? GTFO, we don’t want you in this generation…

      • AdamBoy64

        In your view, is 720p/60fps preferable to 1080p/30fps?

        Like, do you notice (or, do you value) the enhanced frame rate more than the higher resolution?

        • rurifan

          Yes, absolutely. Pixel resolution means nothing outside of screenshots. Games are about movement and as soon as anything move at a low frame rate, all the detail is lost.

          Look at the browser-based frame comparisons here (three Compare Frame Rates): http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates

          Help spread the word; motion resolution is far more important than pixels resolution or effects.

          • AdamBoy64

            Thanks for the link and the info.

            It’s interesting, I’m not in programming or software design at all, but I’m guessing that to get something at 60fps rather than 30fps – it would take maybe twice as much processing power?

            I wonder if, for a lot of developers, whether their hand is forced to make a choice between either 1080p – or 60hz.

  • karmacoma

    The 360 and ONE screens look so similar. I’m not sure if that’s praise to how well it turned out on 360 or how poor the current-gen versions look. They look fine, but it’s not a huge difference at all. Even smaller than the difference between the last-gen/current-gen differences in Assassin’s Creed IV.

    Curious to see the PS3-to-360 comparisons. To my eyes, I feel like the 360 shots are slightly more crisp than the PS3 shots, but it could just be due to the shots being from different environments. It says they’re both sub-720p, upscaled. Makes me wonder if the 360 version is running at an ever so slightly higher resolution. Not like it’d make any difference when you’re actually playing.

    The PS4 version obviously trumps the ONE version. But again, I’m a little disappointed in how similar to the last-gen versions they both appear.

  • Bobby Jennings

    I just gotta post this.

    http://imgur.com/0tbM0A8

  • Elvick

    Gotta love people caring more about graphics “difference” when saying current gen isn’t worth it… when performance is the factor they should be caring about. Enjoy the drawbacks of ancient hardware.

    • AdamBoy64

      I guess the only drawback of older hardware is.. graphics?
      I haven’t noticed any other advantages.

      • Elvick

        I don’t know why this is a reply to my comment, because you clearly didn’t read it.

        • AdamBoy64

          Well, you discussed the drawbacks of hardware. And I asked a question about it.

          It seems like graphics is the only one. In that case, people might not think the enhanced visuals are worth the price tag.

          • Elvick

            You asked a question that is irrelevant, because I already said another drawback in that comment.

            Thus, why I said you didn’t read it. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have asked the question to begin with.

            Graphics =/= only benefit of better hardware

            If you think that you know fuck all about games.

            • AdamBoy64

              Oh yep, now I get it.
              I’ve never really thought about ‘performance’ of a game before.

              More than the actual visuals of the game, you’re talking about games having solid, consistent framerates that don’t drop. (Thereby, a better gaming experience).

              And that being one of the advantages of current-gen compared to last-gen. (and, a more important one).

              • Elvick

                Exactly.

                I don’t know why people are only ever focused on the graphics.

                I know this is of screenshots, but still people can just wait and see. Rather than act like the only benefit of the new hardware is… graphics. Which isn’t the case.

                Whether you’d rather have better graphics, or better performance is another thing. But at least acknowledge that better hardware can improve both things.

                • AdamBoy64

                  Yes, I see what you mean.

                  When I first read ‘performance’ in your post, I immediately thought of ‘processing power’, which in turn I took to mean as ‘graphics’.
                  But now it makes sense to me.

                  I think most people would prefer a game to perform better (eg. no frame-rate drops, or texture degrading), then to get better graphics.
                  You’d kind of hope so.

                  It’s interesting in consoles. My thought in the past is that there’s no excuse for frame-rate drops.

                  The programmers know exactly what the system they’re building for is capable of (unlike the variation in PC’s), and they know what it can handle – and they can design specifically for it.

                  Therefore, they should be able to avoid those sort of things.

                  But yes, there is still quite a bit of it around.
                  It can certainly detract from the experience.

                  It’s something I haven’t really paid much attention to recently, until you bought it up.

                  Perhaps in this generation we should be hoping to see smoother running games, rather than games with just better graphics, necessarily.

                  Thanks for the conversation.

  • Budgiecat

    Interesting. But there doesn’t seem to be an improvement in natural lighting from the 7th gen to 8th comparisons, and overall doesn’t look as impressive as the original Fox Engine tech demo screenshots of that rendered office room…