Titanfall Xbox One 720p bombshell, doubts confirmed

By Alan Ng - Nov 5, 2013

The resolution rumors of the Xbox One do not seem to be going away any time soon. After confirmations of 720p for the likes of Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty Ghosts, it looks like we now have solid evidence that one of Microsoft’s big guns in 2014 is going to be getting the 720p treatment as well.

Although you may not like to hear it, that game could be Titanfall – Microsoft’s Xbox 360 and Xbox One console exclusive, which will see a PC release but won’t be made available on any Sony console.

Both Respawn Entertainment and EA have failed to answer direct questions on what the final resolution of the game will be on Xbox One. We have all seen the amazing gameplay that Respawn has been showing off, but the chances of that gameplay being 1080p native on Xbox One had been put into doubt.

Fast forward to this week, as it looks like Mark Rubin, executive producer at Infinity Ward may have revealed a little information prematurely. When discussing the resolution of his own game Call of Duty Ghosts in relation to the Xbox One rumors, he had this to say:

“I don’t know [If PS4 is the easier to work with] but overall I do know that other companies have been saying that they’re also 720 on Xbox One – BF4 was 720, Titanfall has already said they’re going to be 720 on Xbox One so it seems to be the dominant direction at the moment, but so much can change.”

Correct us if we’re wrong, but has Rubin just revealed the information that Microsoft does not want anyone to find out until Titanfall is out on shelves? After all, we have only just found out the Xbox One resolution of BF4 after the game released, and the resolution of Call of Duty Ghosts on Xbox One, a few weeks before release.

Now that the information is out there, should this be considered a major shock or not? It does seem likely that 720p appears to be the popular choice for many Xbox One developers, even at this early stage. Get in touch with us below if you expected Titanfall to output at 1080p native on Xbox One.

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

Also See: Titanfall 2 as a PS4 exclusive rumor

  • Howard

    Do ppl realise that this is 5 months before its release lmao. Xbox vs ps4 actually have the same amount of games that are NATIVE 1080p, not upscaled but NATIVE. Fifa,need for speed,nba and forza (xbone) fifa,need for speed,nba and killzone (ps4). So at this early stage in the consoles life span (1 month) is it really time to stick the 720p collar. Even battlefield isn’t native on ps4 (900p) just upscaled which was through a day one patch!!!! Developers have an need time to learn the ins an out of the architecture of both consoles. The. Next biggest cross gen title to be released early next year is tomb raider and guess what ppl native 1080p both consoles. Before ppl start saying its just a face lift please research the release of this game an understand the amount of wrk that has been put into this game to release it at native 1080p. When the ps3 was released it had the power to outshine most modern day pcs but which console won the war……..erm yeah. It’s not about shear power. Imagine having a 1000 bhp car but no torque. It’s not about the power u have but how u utilise it. The xbone was built by developers for developers. This is not fanboyism because I own both, the reason I bought both is for the exclusives. I am a gamer and at the end of the day if u want graphics go pc. 4k rigs are closer than u think, when u look at the arcitecture on the xbone on the die you just have to wonder……. Why did they include that 4k capable rdy Hdmi lead. SRAM hmmmmmmmmmm.

  • instantnoodles

    this was a enjoyable read thanks for sharing.

  • instantnoodles

    very well written thanks again for sharing

  • instantnoodles

    well written article thanks for sharing.

  • Dreake Wes

    If TitanFall is not native 1080p, I’m selling my Xbox one and getting a PS4. I rather get a true next gen console and play TF on PC.

  • Velvetmidget

    WTF. I expected minimum1080p for next gen.

  • Rhys Smith

    The console would’ve been better justified as being called the Xbox 720

  • Rhys Smith

    The console should’ve actually been called the Xbox 720 at least it would make more sense than the ‘One’ moniker.

  • robert syarbaini

    If it turns out to be true it will be funny but hopefully it isn’t.

  • B00ME

    How does he know what res TitanFall is? He doesn’t work at Respawn or MS and works for Infinity Ward and Activsion, the same company that screwed the Respawn founders over. Why would they be talking to Mark Rubin about their res?

    • NgTurbo

      How did Adam Boyes know the resolution of Call of Duty Ghosts on Xbox One?

      The world is full of unanswered mysteries..

  • GMAN

    BAHAHAHAHAHA where are the XBOTS now. Next they will say graphics mean nothing.

    • Broc kelley

      they don’t…the greatest games ever didn’t look half as good as what Titanfall looks like…

      • D’shawn

        The Last of Us is one of the greatest games of this generation, along with the uncharted trilogy. Those games are known for their visual prowess, so if they looked like 64 bit monstrosities, it wouldn’t matter? In today’s industry with how much technology is getting better?

        Keep thinking that buddy. Art Style is always more desired than resilution, but don’t say resolution doesn’t matter. It’s better hardware that’s enabled developers t fully implement their creative vision. It’s pushed gaming forward, and without it, we’d still be playing in the 64 bit days.

        • Broc kelley

          I’m not saying we should forget where we came from, in fact I’m saying we need to return to where we came from. If a game’s claim to fame is it’s graphical prowess it will never be game of the year..that’s why Uncharted is compared to the newest Tomb Raider, and why 40% of people feel TLOU was overrated. I’m not saying I fit into either one of those categories, I feel they are both great games; certainly not worth as much money ($60) as a game like Skyrim which you can put 100+ hours into, you can beat TLOU in 8 hours..

          All I’m saying is there are diminishing returns when it comes to how good a game is in comparison to how much you shell out for pretty graphics.

          This is partly my opinion, but look at reviews, look at metacritic, listen to podcast’s; removing the line between interactive and static forms of entertainment are ok as long as our attentions are held the entire time and as long as we are paying the right amount for the content we receive. This is why more sandboxes are beginning to form, this why more RPG elements are being thrown into games of all kinds like First-person shooters..this is why I’m still a gamer.

          I’m sorry to go on and on, but we’ve reached a sort of stagflation..we are at a kind of precipice here. Staring off a cliffside, some people only look forward, they see kinect, augmented reality, total entertainment consoles but they don’t realize the gravity of the situation..pun intended; some only look back and see how far we’ve come and say hey let’s keep going in the direction we’ve gone to make more awesome memories..and to these people I partly agree.. but what I see are the rocks at the bottom and the only viable solution I see is to do what we did when video games first came about: we need to build a bridge. We need to connect all of these great ideas because right now we are spinning our wheels offering more features and better graphics, but the returns are starting to diminish. We’ve thrown billions into the next gen and enough of that money will get used to make the games we want. The sacrifice we are making for this cast-a-wide-net approach is that we will never make as many good games as if we looked back, like you said, but also compared the industry now to what it was then and realize we need better everything, not just graphcis, in order to compete with these awesome memories we’ve made throughout our lives.

    • B00ME

      So you’re a PC gamer then right, if graphics are everything, the PC would be your choice.

      • Dan Davidson

        PC gaming and console gaming is completely different. PC gaming far more expensive, way less comfortable, more inconvenient, DRM and you have to upgrade your system every few years as the new games outdate your PC. Console gaming is my first choice and that’s the same with many and that’s where the graphics difference matters – PlayStation vs Xbox. No one should be comparing them to Nintendo or to PC because they’re completely different markets. And out of the two main consoles, the only thing that really separates them is graphics, performance and exclusives. And since there are very few exclusives right now, we can only judge graphics and performance which seems to be the PS4’s strong point at a cheaper price, therefore the most appealing to those that want the most powerful console (like me) and those that want a cheaper console with all the top 3rd party games. But I would switch to playing 720p games on the Xbox One way before I’d consider a PC or Nintendo. It’s just not the same type of gaming.

        • GH0ST_SE7EN

          What? Do you even understand half the things you’re talking about? PC gaming far more expensive? $700 can build you a better system than next-gen and one that can be future proofed into another generation for not much more. And the money you save on games more than covers any extra cost of the PC. Way less comfortable? A keyboard and mouse gives you better control AND you can use console controls on it. More inconvenient? You get to control everything on you PC instead of waiting for updates. DRM? Going out the window and how is it even a problem compared to Xbox One’s DRM? And you say you have to upgrade your system every few years as the new games outdate your PC? Haven’t updated my PC in 3 years and I can still get ~50fps on BF4 on High at 1600×900. The “next-gen” XB1 can’t even pass 720p, lol. And you don’t need to upgrade, you can just stay with the same hardware and turn settings down, which is exactly what they do for next-gen games on current consoles..

          This doesn’t even go to the possibilities of Steam OS. Anyway, whatever works for you.

        • Dan Davidson

          You’re missing the point, I’m saying that PC is too different to console for PC gamers to just say “everyone should game on PC if they care about graphics”. I get that people prefer it and that’s fine, but for me and for a lot of people, the extra bump in resolution isn’t worth being hunched over your computer desk staring at a tiny 20″ monitor or whatever. I game in my bedroom sat on my two seater with a 42″ screen in front of me and switch HDMI’s between console and Sky TV. It’s comfortable and convenient. Computing wise I have a laptop near the arm of the sofa for basic online searching and Sid Meier’s Pirates! And I don’t know any PC gamer that shares that similar comfort when gaming, which for me is more important than an extra 4FPS lol. Also this isn’t specific to every gamer, but with PlayStation Plus, I get games to play every month so actually spend very little on games so I wouldn’t be saving in that way either. I’m not saying PlayStation > everything else. I’m just saying that personally console gaming > PC gaming. Especially after my friend’s brother has spent over £2,000 on PC gaming hardware in the last 7-8 years compared to a normal person’s £300-£500.

        • GH0ST_SE7EN

          Fair enough. I think it important though to mention that Steam OS and Steamboxes will change things. Whatever conveniences console gaming has can easily be matched with a Steambox, which is also a PC. And £2,000 is way overkill and just means he has money. You can EASILY build a 3-generation PC (sell the graphics card and buy a new one, repeat, repeat) for £800

          Even £800 isn’t that much over £300-£500 (~£400) spread over 7-8 years. Its about £50 a year for a better gaming experience and awesome computer that can do much more than play games. £50 per year seems even less when you take into account the fact that XB1 and PS4 will both require subscriptions to play multiplayer. Sony’s subscription is $9.99/6.99 euros per month, which leads to £75 per year. Oh wait, that means having an XB1/PS4 will be MORE EXPENSIVE than a PC (which you can even make into a Steambox for convenience).

        • Dan Davidson

          PlayStation Plus? No it’s £40 a year and with that you get 2 free Vita games, 3 free PS3 games and 1-2 free PS4 games each month as well as weekly sales that give you 50%-75% off and extra benefits that I don’t care about because I don’t use. I felt like I got my money’s worth of the £40 the month I signed up and I’ve received a lot since including being able to sell the physical versions of games that I got for free digitally. I ended up making half the money towards the PS4 because of that. If I hadn’t signed up to it I’d be a little short for Christmas. So I can’t see how PC gaming is cheaper unless I played 10 games a year and refused to use any of the benefits offered through PlayStation Plus but still pay for it. And you might think PC gaming experience is better than console and that’s fine, but like I said, for me it’s comfort first, if I’m hunched over a desk staring at a tiny monitor, it’s not worth anything to me. For me to be immersed, even in an indie game, I have to be comfortable. I can’t be the only person in the world that sees comfort as more important than resolution and FPS… We all have our preferences, but PC is not “superior” it’s too different to make a statement like that. They both have many pros and cons, but the pros column with consoles are far more suited to my personal gaming needs.

      • GMAN

        I have both High end PC built my self and PS3 with PS4 preordered best of both worlds means if an XBONE game is good enough ill be able to play it on PC and not miss out on the PS exclusives