Sledgehammer Games’ Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare is currently live for all those who pre-ordered the Zero Day Edition of the game, which granted early access on November 3rd, and reviews are making their way out ahead of the worldwide release. In the midst of all this, Sledgehammer’s studio co-founder Michael Condrey revealed the resolution for the Xbox One and PS4 versions in a Reddit AMA.

For the Xbox One, Condrey revealed that, “Minimum Xbox One resolution is 1360×1080, and dynamically scales from there to full 1080p. That’s over 50% increase from last year.”

The PS4 has the advantage here though as “Advanced Warfare runs native 1080p on PS4.” However, both versions of the game are “running at rock solid 60fps.”

Even though the Xbox One still isn’t true 1080p, it’s a very noticeable bump up from Call of Duty: Ghosts which ran at 720p resolution on the Xbox One. What are your thoughts on both consoles’ resolutions? Let us know in the comments.

Titanfall is now available for all and sundry – in North America, at least – and Respawn producer Drew McCoy is currently answering questions about future updates to the game on Twitter. More importantly, he’s provided an indicator as to when we can see an increase in the resolution for the Xbox One version.

Titanfall launched at 792p resolution and there was talk of at least trying to get it to 900p resolution with AA still present. When asked as to when the game would get a resolution increase, McCoy said, “Maybe never. Working on improving performance alongside. We’ll see how it goes…” So there’s still a chance, if a small one.

McCoy also indicated several other new features upcoming in future updates including a companion app, resolving chat problems, adjusting matchmaking and lobbies to balance teams out, removing the 60 FPS frame rate cap on PC and more. He also shot down any chances of an increase to player count by stating that, “Any change, especially player count, is a huge deal for a tightly designed game like this. More than you could imagine.”

Titanfall will be launching on March 14th in Europe though, which we’re mere hours away from. Will you be suiting up? Let us know below.

A Twitter user who apparently got his hands on the PlayStation 4 early ahead of its release in North America has tweeted images of the system’s various settings. One picture in particular reveals that the usable space for the console isn’t actually 500 GB when you start off with. Rather, it’s 408 GB. Check it out below.

Gonna need a higger hdd pic.twitter.com/nrIZDz4Rpf

— CJ (@cjcool804) November 12, 2013

As can be seen, space is occupied by various applications and their saved data. However, when you look further down, you’ll notice that the free space left after all these deductions is actually 323 GB. So yes, you’re actually getting a 408 GB HDD in the box.

Other images showcase different start-up settings including how using the PS4 with voice is enabled by default, how to access the resolution, changing the safe area and more. Check them out below.

pic.twitter.com/AcpIy3Fhnf

— CJ (@cjcool804) November 12, 2013

pic.twitter.com/yAoQRWp4hz

— CJ (@cjcool804) November 12, 2013

That’s a default setting pic.twitter.com/yqo44X2GHP

— CJ (@cjcool804) November 12, 2013

Bout to redo the boot up video cuz I fucked up the other 1 pic.twitter.com/dwJc2ICUrz

— CJ (@cjcool804) November 12, 2013

What are your thoughts on the HDD space? Let us know in the comments below. The PS4 will launch on November 15th in North America and November 29th in Europe.

Interestingly, for a normal forward renderer, 32 MB is the exact amount of space necessary to store one 4x MSAA 32 bpp 1080p frame buffer. However, due to the need to output more than just the pixel colour with the renderer, you’ll require multiple buffers. This explains why the anti-aliasing and resolution needs to be turned down for some games on the Xbox One – the 32 MB eSRAM is somewhat of a limiting factor.

The Xbox 360 had the same trouble with eDRAM and solved it by rendering only specific portions of a scene at a time, exchanging different buffers as necessary. Tiled resources are better, since you can avoid drawing your scene twice, but are difficult to properly implement. So a creative approach in the case of first person shooter games, would be to render the bottom half of your screen, which features more objects, using eSRAM while the top half – which is usually empty using the normal VRAM. This allows you to effectively remove less intensive portions from the frame buffer in order to have the eSRAM working on the more complicated bits.

Will this be the de facto solution for the Xbox One, especially since it took developers a while to implement the same approach on the Xbox 360 using eDRAM? It’s unlikely in the beginning stages of the Xbox One’s life cycle, resulting in a drop of resolution and AA, but given a couple of years, we could see some creative use of the eSRAM without a serious hit in performance or visuals.

Why include eSRAM at all if it becomes a limiting factor? Simply due to its bandwidth for tiled texture middleware, which is reportedly 192 GB/s. Also, it appropriately helps make Cloud gaming more possible on normal internet connections thanks to its LZ encode/decode compression abilities. So whether we believe so or not, Microsoft knew what it was doing when it included eSRAM into the Xbox One. We’ll just have to wait and see if devs can deliver the best visual experience possible while taking advantage of the eSRAM’s many benefits.