Kinect Sports Rivals runs at 1080p and 30fps on Xbox One, says Rare

Tuesday, 5th November 2013 20:58 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Kinect Sports Rivals runs at 1080p and 30fps on Xbox One, according to Rare’s executive producer Danny Isaac, but there’s more to the next-gen offering than just pixels, frames, and rendering.

Speaking with OXM, Isaac said while the “rendering guys just wanted to be at 1080p,” there’s more to next-gen than just comparing numbers.

“We’re at 1080p, but to be honest that was because our rendering guys just wanted to be at 1080p,” he said. “I think when you look at the platforms, now more than ever it’s going to be about – ‘OK, the graphics and resolution are part of the story, but there’s also the service you have, the intuitiveness of the sharing, the multiplayer aspects of it.’

“Years ago, when I was a kid, it was all about how many polygons you could push around, and everyone was pixel-counting. I think that’s still important, but it’s much less of the story than it used to be.

“I think everybody always looks at numbers. If you think about photography and cameras, it’s just megapixels, megapixels, megapixels. Can anyone really tell the difference between a 41 megapixel shot and a 21 megapixel shot? Probably not. For some people that’s going to be really really important. Some people will want to get high end PCs, and run at the highest settings they can, buy multi-thousand pound rigs to do that. But for myself personally, I’m more interested in the experience all around.

“I think ultimately it’s going to be the whole experience that people think about, and I think while Microsoft’s done well with the Xbox previously, what they’ve done with Xbox One is to build out that service. It’s going to be about supporting that box as it goes through its life, delivering those services and experiences, outside of just playing the game.

“With things like Game DVR, where you can upload your clips to the cloud. Stuff that we could only dream of last generation is going to be a reality this generation. I think that’s really where the battle will be, but obviously initially everybody just wants to compare the numbers.”

Kinect Sports Rivals releases alongside Xbox One on November 22.



  1. Erthazus

    “Can anyone really tell the difference between a 41 megapixel shot and a 21 megapixel shot?”

    Amateur photographer. If you are looking at the high end camera. You don’t look at megapixels.

    you look at the resolution.
    Aspect Ratio
    Maybe CMOS
    Balance of White or black pictures.
    Exposure Compensation
    Recording/Recording resolution
    and obviously display with decent battery life.

    Gaming polygons or resolution has nothing to do with megapixels example.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Eregol

    They can’t even get this up to 1080/60? It’s hardly pushing boundaries graphically.

    I guess the frame rate doesn’t matter too much, not like the Kinect input needs that extra speed bump.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. Hcw87


    Looks pretty good for being a Kinect game.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Erthazus

    Water effects are great. But BF4 is much better at this.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. Panthro

    ‘Some people will want to get high end PCs, and run at the highest settings they can, buy multi-thousand pound rigs to do that. But for myself personally, I’m more interested in the experience all around.’

    Multi thousand pound rigs? To run at the highest settings? He couldnt be more wrong.

    You could get a PC that can run games on the highest settings for £700.

    If you really do your research you could get that for less.


    But anyway… LOL

    Its pretty weird all the news coming about about the X1 with games already having to cut back on something to achieve either a higher resolution or higher frame rate. And don’t give me that bullshit about ‘ohh optimization in the years to come blah blah blah’

    Its looking bad for xbox since all those tech head console gamers who want a stronger console are probably looking at the PS4 now instead.

    Ofc, its not a massive majority; but still, every lost purchase counts.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. illuminatusv


    As a Kinect game 60fps is not feasible because of the input latency kinect still have.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. Hcw87

    ”Its looking bad for xbox since all those tech head console who want a stronger console”

    What, like everyone bought a PS3 because it was more powerful?

    #7 1 year ago
  8. Phoenixblight


    There is a difference. PS3 was said to be more powerful with little to no evidence as otherwise where here Xbox is the one coming out and saying as much.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. Panthro


    Are you suggesting that there isn’t any people out there whose opinions are not swayed by which console has better performance?

    Are you really trying to say that?



    #9 1 year ago
  10. Hcw87


    Anyway, i’m sure you remember when they announced the PS3 with toy story graphics/power of the cell etc. The cell was also said to be more advanced than any PC hardware at the time (and it was, but obviously hard to code for).

    So yes, the PS3 was seen as a more powerful competitor to X360 when it came out.

    Nope, i’m just saying the same thing happened with PS3, and it didn’t really influence much at all.

    You gotta remember, casuals rule the gaming scene nowadays. And they couldn’t care less about resolutions.

    Look at CoD.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. Panthro


    Which is why I said

    ‘Ofc, its not a massive majority; but still, every lost purchase counts.’

    And Xbox had a massive lead release on Playstation which forced many peoples hands into buying one because of wanting a newer generation console.

    That hurt PS a lot in the beginning but with these consoles and the release scheduled so tight together mostly everyone can wait to get the console they want right away.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. Hcw87

    ”Its looking bad for xbox”

    ”Ofc, its not a massive majority”

    Those kinda cancel eachother out.

    I don’t see why people need to foresee the doom of XB1 before the console has even had its first year.

    #12 1 year ago
  13. Nephilimator

    Lipstick on a pig?

    #13 1 year ago
  14. Panthro

    ‘every lost purchase counts.’

    They add up, and for the causal gamers who only read gaming news occasionally or hear about stuff through word of mouth and they hear from there friends:

    ‘I heard PS4 has a 50% edge on Xbox this time’
    ‘You heard about Cod ghosts? I heard something about it looking better on PS4′

    Etc, Etc.

    I think that will influence many purchases in my opinion

    #14 1 year ago
  15. Legendaryboss

    And here we go…

    #15 1 year ago
  16. Phoenixblight


    Who said? Sony? That is irrelevant. Xbox Developers are coming out and saying their game can only do 900P,720P, etc. There is no spinning here. With Next gen consoles releasing so tight together and hardware being pretty similar, people are practically splitting hairs on what system they want right now. Since the PS4 is coming out in higher resolution and various other things, those that are counting the pluses and minuses will jump to the PS4. Granted that won’t be huge numbers but that will persuade some people to just go for the PS4.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. Panthro

    I’m not arguing over which console is ‘better’ or anything.

    I’m just stating my opinion that I think console gamers purchases are too influenced on the power of a system and that of its competitors.

    We dont know the final judgement on what system sells more or how much of a close draw it is.

    But I cant wait to hear which one does better, I hope it will be a PS2 vs Dreamcast situation where one consoles sales decimate the other, just to make it a little bit interesting.

    I don’t care for whichever console yet, I will be buying one eventually but I need more software to decide first.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. TheBlackHole


    Okay, I was with you up until you called CoD ‘casual’.

    Does anyone actually remember CoD2 or Modern Warfare? I hate how gamers adore a series until it becomes popular, then denounce it as being ‘casual’ or ‘mainstream’, as if that’s somehow a bad thing. I guess people do this with music all the fucking time, so I shouldn’t expect games to be treated any differently.

    Would you all prefer it if developers who made great games just have mediocre success, enough for you to enjoy the game, but not so much that it ceases to be ‘cool’?

    Also, as for PS3 – That console IS more powerful than the 360, but it’s such an arse to develop for that it’s simply not worth it unless you’re first party.

    The difference with the PS4 is that it’s simply designed – a PC in a box if you will, with really good hardware that’s not ‘balanced’ per se, but it’s uncomplicated and straight forward. I’d like to clarify that I don’t credit Sony for this, and certainly not Mark Cerny. They’ve just made a PC and cased it up, and there are definitely areas the PS4 could have been improved.

    Now the Xbox One is in an unfortunate position. Firstly, MS were late out the blocks finalising specs and delivering dev tools, and the console is not as straight forward as the PS4. It has many custom components that clearly work together well , and they’ve gone out of their way to create a perfectly ‘balanced’ system that’s designed to get the most out of the hardware it has, but that will take time to get used to for a developer.

    I genuinely don’t see the gap between the two consoles increasing beyond what it is now. they just aren’t that far apart. The Xbox is capable of more than it’s showing, and that will be clear during the second and third gen titles.

    Lastly, I wanted to touch on the ‘balance’ issue. Balance is not suggesting that the consoles have power parity, it simply means that the console is designed to get the most out of its components and the most efficient power/price (price per component, not per console). PS4 started this way, but they decided at the last minute to double the RAM, which is great for developers, but meant they are paying more per box than MS are for the One. The One has cheaper components, but the overall package is not that far behind the PS4. I would probably call them about 10-15% apart, and that’s largely due to the Xbox requiring more of its RAM and processing power to be locked to the OS, Kinect and snap features.

    The problem for MS is that the 10-15% is enough for a developer to drop res by half, because the hardware scaling is actually very good. Take battlefield for example. The PS4 version looks better, sure, but not half a million pixels better – no way.

    BTW, this is coming from someone who is working on both consoles (closely, but not as a tech guy), but this being the internet, you can take it or leave it.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. TheBlackHole

    P.s. Expect console pro gaming to stay predominantly with the Xbox next gen. 100% dedicated servers and a superior controller make that a no brainer.

    #19 1 year ago
  20. gomersoul

    Why pay more for less, ps4 makes sense. Get an xbone when price drops

    #20 1 year ago
  21. TheBlackHole

    “Why pay more for less”

    You’re not. You’re paying more for other things.

    If you mainly care about graphics (but don’t play PC) and/or Sony first party, then PS4 is an obvious choice. It’s not the only choice though, and still not definitively the best one.

    #21 1 year ago
  22. Panthro


    Hmm I dont agree with you on the whole ‘once something becomes popular it becomes casual or too mainstream’

    A lot of games come out that are great and sell very well and aren’t classed as that, take the elder scrolls and GTA V as perfect examples.

    Once a developer begins churning out a game every 12 months and with each iteration being further and further diluted and less innovative I think people have a right to stand up and say what they don’t like about it.

    I adored call of duty 4 and 5, mainly because that’s when the series was brought to my attention properly and tons of my friends were playing it online, it felt so fresh and new.

    Modern Warfare was great, since then they haven’t made that much of an effort to create something ‘new’ apart from zombies mode, which was amazing!

    I’m tired of Call of Duty now, as are thousands of other ex-fans, I didnt stop liking it because it gained popularity, I stopped liking it when it seemed like the developers weren’t putting enough effort and time into the sequels for me to warrant a purchase.

    Also, the whole Fifa and cod are the only games the casual gamers own is sometimes true, I know plenty.

    #22 1 year ago
  23. TheBlackHole


    Can you define ‘casual gamer’?

    I wouldn’t confuse them with ‘hit buyer’. They are two VERY different demographics.

    #23 1 year ago
  24. Hcw87

    Indeed. The problem with Call of Duty is that it’s TOO rewarding. It’s too easy to play. It’s way too easy to be ”good” at the game, therefore it draws more people in. The early Call of Duty games started out good, but when they started implementing Killstreaks and Perks galore it turned into an entirely different beast.

    Compare it to Battlefield, where people dislike it because the maps are ”too large” and you have to run across the map to find people to shoot. Both these claims are false, because all it takes is learning the maps and you’ll have plenty of people to shoot. It’s a learning curve, and that’s something the Call of Duty players are so unfamiliar with by now.

    So again, Call of Duty nowadays IS mostly casual (sure there are some hardcore players that plays CoD, and CoD alone), but the majority consists of casuals out for a quick and easy sense of fulfillment.

    #24 1 year ago
  25. Joe Musashi

    Microsoft’s ‘balance’ argument is just as much a PR buzzword as ‘the cloud’. As yet, they have shown no evidence of the worth of either.


    #25 1 year ago
  26. Panthro


    I would define it as someone who rarely tries new types of games and only buys sequels of games they have already played/ follows trends set by there friends.

    My stepdad and younger cousins are what I class casual gamers as, They always have the latest Fifa and Call of Duty but that’s about it.

    They treat there gaming experiences as something ‘casual’, like using it to play with friends occasionally etc.

    There isn’t anything wrong with being a casual gamer either, I don’t know why a lot of people use the term as an insult.

    #26 1 year ago
  27. Hcw87

    Just to set you straight on one point (and i won’t keep replying to you, because knowing you this will get dragged out until the early morning hours), the KNOWN advantage of the cloud is dedicated server (and compute) support for EVERY single Xbox One game. Again, i’m sure you’ll deny this as you usually do, but everyone knows this is true by now.

    #27 1 year ago
  28. Joe Musashi

    You do know what the word “shown” means. Yes?


    #28 1 year ago
  29. Hcw87

    Do you want pictures of a dedicated server park?

    Forza 5, Dead Rising 3, Ryse. Those are Xbox One games. There is footage of Ryse multiplayer (Which again is running on Dedicated Servers). Watch those, and they’d have ”shown” it to you.

    I don’t know of any other way to ”show” someone how dedicated servers work. Perhaps google is a means to that end.

    #29 1 year ago
  30. Major Mayhem 70

    Preach Blackhole, preach!!!!

    #30 1 year ago
  31. Phoenixblight


    MS having its own dedicated server for each game is fantastic. The cloud computation has yet to show its advantages.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. monkeygourmet


    I do presume you were displaying the same amount of logic when it came to the Bluray / Cell / Emotion Engine / PSP Go / Wonder Book / etc… Marketing spiel?

    I’m not saying you didn’t, but you seem pin sharp on pointing out any MS wrong doing at the moment.

    #32 1 year ago
  33. Nephilimator

    @31 Cloud computation does not lend itself to in game compute assistance so don’t hold your breath. Latency is too high for it to do anything unless they are just going to make xbone a dumb terminal and send screen scrapes to it like Onlive. Even in that scenario you still have to deal with input lag crossing over a connection that is probably 30+ ms latency for even a decent consumer line in the United States anyways.

    #33 1 year ago
  34. Sang2

    I bought a PS3 because it had Blu-ray, Backwards Compatibility, Didn’t Overheat, Better Specs and because it just pleased me more. People always buy the superior console, and more now that the superior console is cheaper than the competitor.

    #34 1 year ago
  35. Phoenixblight


    I already know this stuff. That is why I said Cloud computation has yet to show its advantages. There is no game so far using any cloud computation so it will be a while until we see if that proves an advantage.

    #35 1 year ago
  36. Super Girevik

    After playing COD:Ghosts and Battlefield 4 on the Xbox 360, I just have one thing to say, I’m going with the platform that delivers the best online experience. Whether it be PC, playstation 4 or xbox one. I’m so tired of lost connections and lagged up games.

    It’s frustrating to be doing well in a match only to have a lost network connection error or to join a match only to see soldiers ice skating around the map. Bring next-gen online gaming and I’m sold! If not, I’m going full circle to Wolfenstein and relive the evolution of the FPS all over again.

    #36 1 year ago
  37. Joe Musashi

    LOL at

    1) People who don’t know what “shown” means
    2) People with hilariously hypocritical agendas

    Given the sheer amount of misleading information given by a company. Their inability to answer a simple question with a simple answer (how fast does it boot?), their desire to delay showing games as long as possible (embargos on Xbox One reviews of multiplatform games) it is not unreasonable for people to be increasingly wary.

    Particulary when an additional premium is being charged for these, as yet, unproven and theoretical ‘advantages’. (‘Bu bu bu.. it’s proven!’ you say? Fine! show me then.)

    Sadly, some people can’t see beyond their own bias or painfully obvious agendas and would prefer to suggest that asking for evidence of something’s worth from the people selling it is some kind of bad thing. We should all just shut up and accept the sales-pitch as fact.

    My points still stand. My questions remain unanswered.

    All the subterfuge and deflection in the world – by Microsoft, by the aggressive Microsoft endorsers, by those that are desperately trying to make this some sort of personal point – hasn’t changed that.


    #37 1 year ago
  38. Hcw87

    Forza5 and Titanfall.

    You’re as predictable as ever.

    #38 1 year ago
  39. DrDamn

    On balance. You said “PS4 started this way, but they decided at the last minute to double the RAM” … how did adding RAM make it imbalanced? Or are you just talking about cost?

    How much of the X1 customisations are about OS features and support and not strictly about making games better?

    PS4 has plenty of customisations too …

    #39 1 year ago
  40. DrDamn

    Do you know what cloud compute actually does in Forza? Genuine question as it’s not very clear to me. It doesn’t do anything actually in races does it? It just analyses data and updates AI profiles, then provides them to players as far as I can see.

    So why is that any better than that calculation being done locally post race when there are plenty of resources available and just communicating the updates with a game server somewhere?

    #40 1 year ago
  41. Dragon


    #41 1 year ago
  42. Hcw87

    Nothing other than pulling AI from the servers and (possibly) updating them in realtime.

    Other than that i have nothing else when it comes to Forza, but Titanfall speaks for itself. Their AI (bots) are running on the cloud in realtime, so they can actually deploy them whenever dynamically.

    Dedicated servers for every game is enough to make me go XB1 for multiplats, i can’t stand having to look after my NAT settings weekly because of a crappy router.

    #42 1 year ago
  43. TheBlackHole


    Cost, predominantly. You look at the quality and relative cost of those parts and it’s clear Sony were less concerned with making efficiencies in design as MS were. There just aren’t as many custom parts. I appreciate there are still plenty of customisations, as you point out, but they aren’t as deeply integrated as the One. It’s much more like a build-your-own PC (albeit a good one). Really, that’s why you’re seeing developers struggle with the One out of the gates. Too many new systems to master over a very short period of time. PS4′s raw power and relatively simple structure is easier to get results from without learning its nuances and intricacies.

    On the surface this makes the PS4 look like a good thing for the consumer, but there are definitely areas they are weaker in than MS, despite the raw power differential – Having dedicated audio processing for example, or the fact that MS have invested massively in dedicated server infrastructure. Also, don’t discount the value of the multiple OS approach MS have taken. It may look like window dressing for ‘TV’ and other Apps, but I think people will be surprised at what a difference it will make to the overall entertainment/games experience over the next decade. It’s certainly more future-proof than the PS4′s interface. Let’s not forget that every Xbox will essentially be a dev kit too – that’s a great call IMO for the indie community.

    “How much of the X1 customisations are about OS features and support and not strictly about making games better?”

    Well, I wouldn’t say that they are all mutually exclusive. The customisations are at a hardware and software level, and largely can be seen to benefit both game and non-game features. My main concern at this point is how much of the console’s power is reserved for non-game functions, but as MS have publicly stated, this will change over time as efficiencies are made to the way the OS runs alongside live games.

    The simple version is thus:

    PS4 – Easy to make something run well. Stronger hardware (albeit comparable to the difference between PS3 and Xbox 360, i.e. not much). Weaker UI. Fewer services (or universal apps that run across the Sony brand, such as Music/movies unlimited).

    Xbox One. Harder (at launch) to get the best from. Slightly weaker hardware. Better UI. Better multitasking (which I appreciate is a niche requirement, but a benefit nonetheless).

    Both have excellent second screen support and cloud features (Vita, Gaikai vs Smartglass, dedicated servers, cloud services)

    I think, over the course of the next decade, both consoles will merge into much the same thing. Games machines with additional features and apps. Same as has happened to phones, tablets and PCs.

    #43 1 year ago
  44. DrDamn

    “Having dedicated audio processing for example”

    Like the PS4. I understand that the X1 chip can do more, but there is still dedicated hardware in there for the PS4.

    “Well, I wouldn’t say that they are all mutually exclusive.”

    No I appreciate that. The OS/Eco system you play in can improve your enjoyment of a game, but it’s a variable factor for people. The snap stuff I can see being a great feature for some, but I have no interest in that at all. Being able to switch back and forth between apps yes, run them side by side no.

    In the end how close the X1 can get to PS4 in pure games performance terms is still dependent on both MS making that balance exploitable and Devs exploiting it. How close is close enough is another matter :).

    “It’s certainly more future-proof than the PS4′s interface.”

    Agree to an extent, but I think Sony have also left some in reserve there to be exploited depending on where the market goes. As an example pre-memory bump they had 0.5GB reserved for the OS and now 3.5GB for the OS post bump. It’s clearly not doing as much as the X1 OS yet so you have to think they are sitting on some as a future consideration.

    #44 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.