Interesting that games are "graphically castrated" for launch titles when they still look that nice.
Interesting read but sadly not all that surprising. Was sort of already aware of this sort of practices that have occurred in the past. In the end, profit will take front seat. Let us just hope that the simplicity and ease of working with the architecture allows for the variance of the two consoles to be more noticeable in the end.
Also, in terms of graphics and looks, it was almost always the case that the graphics improve down the line. Due to deadlines and being launch titles, companies tend to not push the consoles until further in their life. Which is why although I am looking forward to games like Killzone, I am expecting amazing games in the next few years.
Interesting that games are "graphically castrated" for launch titles when they still look that nice.
Interesting read but sadly not all that surprising. Was sort of already aware of this sort of practices that have occurred in the past. In the end, profit will take front seat. Let us just hope that the simplicity and ease of working with the architecture allows for the variance of the two consoles to be more noticeable in the end.
Also, in terms of graphics and looks, it was almost always the case that the graphics improve down the line. Due to deadlines and being launch titles, companies tend to not push the consoles until further in their life. Which is why although I am looking forward to games like Killzone, I am expecting amazing games in the next few years.
Oh, definitely. But that difference is huge, and if they are keeping the graphics down by that much and it still looks that good then this generation is going to be crazy. I mean, base performance without optimization is 50%... imagine what it can do optimized in a few years. As long as there is much optimization to do since they should be fairly familiar with the console due to the PC-like architecture...
I was going to try to pre-order a PS4 to get it as soon as possible, but realizing there are no games I am really that hyped for apart from games that will be coming out for PC at the same time\before anyway (pretty much watch dogs) I'll just hold off until there is a game I know i really want to buy the console with (e.g getting great reviews etc) and buy then. Will probably lean toward a PS4 but might be swayed and get XBO instead.
One question, what is the name of the game that was showed on E3 where it was some kind of Co-op survival game that had tons of hype around it? I remember the trailer was 2 guys and 1 girl going in to some building to look for stuff then on their way out they got ambushed or something. Pretty sure it was a next gen title and it looked pretty awesome.
Interesting that games are "graphically castrated" for launch titles when they still look that nice.
There are a bunch of problems with that article and so called sources. Why would anyone compare performance between two when you change both the resulted fps and resolution. There are also issues with their claims of ALU performance when the cpu's are the same, okay so the difference is in GPGPU performance but then why claim that the cpu overclock on the xbox one makes a difference GPGPU and CPU uses to a smart developer runs very different math functions.
PS4 is superior in hardware but 30% shaders doesn't equate to 1:1 gains at best you're looking at 10-20% gains and shaders don't do everything games have ai, Also the PS4 does not have a dedicated audio DSP. The only thing Sony has alluded to is a dedicated compression/decompression chip which is a very very small part of audio processing. That means the CPU is still responsible for doing the actual DSP which is a lot more work than anyone thinks and will tie up a fair amount of processing power bunch of little things here and there. Then people complain about ROP but that would only lead to pushed higher and higher resolutions are more fps xbox one is designed to operate at 1080p 60fps so that's how much they put in it, ps4 has the ability to push 4k reasonably if sony wanted to but games would never keep up, movies could.
The only way that articles makes sense is if you assume that sony has made a much better O/S, drivers and api for the ps4 then Microsoft could which would be an absurd assumption.
I would rather believe names sources vs "anon" (made up) ones. And john carmack is a good source as he has gone out of his way to bash MS over the years and refuse to use direct X. Yet he says there is not so much difference ... well except he goes on to scrub Kinect.
The article is click bait, doesn't name sources and the details given are sketchy at best. That's why it wasn't posted.
The change in fps/resolution is a viable comparison. They are saying that it isnt playable at 1080p, and so you have to reduce the resolution to 1600x900 in order to get playable framerates (in the 20s). They could have said in the teens or lower but that is usually not done in benchmarking games. Usually it references the highest playable resolution.
The ALU performance is just one thing. We don't have a way to verify the claims. Also, shaders is nearly 1:1.
Also, the article shows both sides, with some disagreement among developers and some points going towards the xbox1, so I dont see how there are problems or click bait. Sources are NEVER given in journalism when it is information that isnt supposed to be released. That kind of stuff will get people FIRED. People tend to like their jobs.
On September 17 2013 03:03 TheRabidDeer wrote: The change in fps/resolution is a viable comparison. They are saying that it isnt playable at 1080p, and so you have to reduce the resolution to 1600x900 in order to get playable framerates (in the 20s). They could have said in the teens or lower but that is usually not done in benchmarking games. Usually it references the highest playable resolution.
The ALU performance is just one thing. We don't have a way to verify the claims. Also, shaders is nearly 1:1.
Also, the article shows both sides, with some disagreement among developers and some points going towards the xbox1, so I dont see how there are problems or click bait. Sources are NEVER given in journalism when it is information that isnt supposed to be released. That kind of stuff will get people FIRED. People tend to like their jobs.
Neogaf if you claim to be an expert you end up contacted by a mod and you have to prove as such else get perma banned http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=676989 Also you think a 3rd party developer would get fired over this? Probably because he would get caught at his job talking about of his ass. The source is multiple developers?!?! but it's time to cherry pick comments and just say one developer said "xxx" and yet we can't name any developers. That's bad journalism all you have is the ethos of the publication and the journalist.
Edge has a history of salacious crap to sell, doesn't mean they lie but they frame things to be salacious and that's just what that articles does. It frames things so that people who don't get what's what get confused and take things to mean one thing when it can mean and usually does mean another. Probably why you end up getting threads on neogaf with every print of Edge.
The simple nature of developers is you'll get games that look pretty similar across consoles only 1st party titles will try for a bit more then that. The power gap between ps4 and xb1 is very similar to that of the ps3 and xb360 and guess what you get very similar fud being spread around the Internet. Maybe exacerbated by use of similar hardware no more vague crap like old mac days of x86 vs powerPC that just left people in their own camps.
On September 17 2013 03:03 TheRabidDeer wrote: The change in fps/resolution is a viable comparison. They are saying that it isnt playable at 1080p, and so you have to reduce the resolution to 1600x900 in order to get playable framerates (in the 20s). They could have said in the teens or lower but that is usually not done in benchmarking games. Usually it references the highest playable resolution.
The ALU performance is just one thing. We don't have a way to verify the claims. Also, shaders is nearly 1:1.
Also, the article shows both sides, with some disagreement among developers and some points going towards the xbox1, so I dont see how there are problems or click bait. Sources are NEVER given in journalism when it is information that isnt supposed to be released. That kind of stuff will get people FIRED. People tend to like their jobs.
Neogaf if you claim to be an expert you end up contacted by a mod and you have to prove as such else get perma banned http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=676989 Also you think a 3rd party developer would get fired over this? Probably because he would get caught at his job talking about of his ass. The source is multiple developers?!?! but it's time to cherry pick comments and just say one developer said "xxx" and yet we can't name any developers. That's bad journalism all you have is the ethos of the publication and the journalist.
Edge has a history of salacious crap to sell, doesn't mean they lie but they frame things to be salacious and that's just what that articles does. It frames things so that people who don't get what's what get confused and take things to mean one thing when it can mean and usually does mean another. Probably why you end up getting threads on neogaf with every print of Edge.
The simple nature of developers is you'll get games that look pretty similar across consoles only 1st party titles will try for a bit more then that. The power gap between ps4 and xb1 is very similar to that of the ps3 and xb360 and guess what you get very similar fud being spread around the Internet. Maybe exacerbated by use of similar hardware no more vague crap like old mac days of x86 vs powerPC that just left people in their own camps.
Why in God's name did you link me to an 85 page thread? Why is NeoGAF relevant?
Yes I think a single individual involved in the development of a 3rd party title would get fired over this. Sources are notoriously ANONYMOUS for such things (there is a LONG history of anonymous sources in anything journalism). This is how journalists are able to get stories like this at all. I also don't see how they cherry picked comments since they also included things like "Xbox One does, however, boast superior performance to PS4 in other ways. “Let’s say you are using procedural generation or raytracing via parametric surfaces – that is, using a lot of memory writes and not much texturing or ALU – Xbox One will be likely be faster,” said one developer." The article even says that the Xbox1 may catch up with simply better drivers, since they are apparently behind the PS4's.
I dont get why you bring up ps3 and xbox360 when they are both hugely different with a different focus. And yes, games will largely look about the same but there are times when framerates can be an issue. We saw this with capcom games on the PS3 because they didnt optimize it well so the x360 version is always played for any capcom fighting game.
PS4 doesn't have a robust audio DSP? That'd be news to me considering Sony have packed in fairly robust audio hardware in all of their consoles (in the case of the PS3, I'm fairly sure the SPEs could do the grunt work). And you didn't even quote Mark Cerny correctly:
Mark Cerny: Another thing the PlayStation 4 team did to increase the flexibility of the console is to put many of its basic functions on dedicated units on the board -- that way, you don't have to allocate resources to handling these things.
"The reason we use dedicated units is it means the overhead as far as games are concerned is very low," said Cerny. "It also establishes a baseline that we can use in our user experience."
"For example, by having the hardware dedicated unit for audio, that means we can support audio chat without the games needing to dedicate any significant resources to them. The same thing for compression and decompression of video." The audio unit also handles decompression of "a very large number" of MP3 streams for in-game audio, Cerny added.
I think its clear that whatever hardware they've dumped in the PS4 decodes and processes audio streams. Which is basically the same shit as what the Xbox One's SHAPE processor is meant to do, only that I'm fairly sure the SHAPE processor is far more robust considering its Kinect focus. Just because they haven't gone on about it doesn't mean its not there...I mean does anyone really know what the secondary processor in the PS4 even is?
Now I don't know if the Playstation 4 is 50% more powerful than the Xbox One. I don't think the gap is quite that large and the manifestations in real life will not be that huge (so Carmack is right). But you're being hilarious and disingenuous with your arguments.
Its clear that the PS4 GPU is better than the Xbox One's GPU by a country mile. Its not just shaders. The PS4 has 6 more CUs, more shaders, 6 more asynchronous compute engines with far more compute queues as well as more ROPs (probably not useful for 1920x1080 content). Its a whole different class of GPU that is not only more powerful but has a strong compute focus.
This difference can be seen in launch games. If we're going by resolution and FPS, the only game that is running at 1920x1080 on the Xbox One is Forza 5. While its fantastic that they've gone for 60 FPS and great image quality (aka the right decision for a racing game), the game is not exactly being ambitious with its pre-baked lighting and fixed weather/time.
Every other game, be it Ryse or Killer Instinct, is running at lower resolutions like 1600x900...most are running at what seems to be 30FPS too. Compare that to every exclusive game from Sony: all of them are basically running at 1920x1080@30 FPS with graphical effects up the wazoo. Now, if this isn't representative of a large graphical power difference I don't know what is.
I can also believe that Sony have created a set of drivers, documentation and development tools that are comparable to what Microsoft offers. Heck, Avalanche Studios said only a few months ago that Sony's development software were further ahead than Microsoft's.
And things don't stay in a vacuum. They created the ICE Team to make developing for the PS3 somewhat easier and you can see that result in multi-platform games reaching some sort of parity. Consider that the PS3 is a console with memory limitations and using a GPU that was architecturally obsolete at launch - they've done a great job at turning the ship around. So I have no reason to doubt that the PS4 has a robust backend, especially since so many indie games are being developed for the PS4 and large developers, such as Ubisoft, have praised how easy it is to get shit working with the PS4.
So maybe that Microsoft might have secret sauce that Sony doesn't have but right now I'm not seeing any sauce. Do I think the Xbox One will put out games wildly inferior to the PS4? No, you can upscale 1600x900 to 1920x1080 quite well with some effort and there will be good workarounds to reach relative parity. Do I think Sony are a bunch of idiots who don't know how to program software? No, I think the people at SCE are very competent at what they do as they have proven time and time again...only now they have a piece of hardware that isn't some crazy alien to develop for.
Okay guys i havent been uptodate with consoles since the playstation 2 but i am in the market for a next-gen console now. My question is will i be able to play all the ps3 titles on my (maybe) ps4 in december?
On September 18 2013 04:03 chroniX wrote: Okay guys i havent been uptodate with consoles since the playstation 2 but i am in the market for a next-gen console now. My question is will i be able to play all the ps3 titles on my (maybe) ps4 in december?
No. Supposedly you'll be able to play them through streaming (if you've ever used OnLive, it'll be like that), but there's no actual backwards compatibility.
If you want to play PS3 games, buy a PS3. They're dirt cheap these days, at least in the US/Canada.
Sony will be holding not one but two press conference at Tokyo Game Show 2013. The first one will be about specific details related to all upcoming Playstation products (including PS4, PS VITA TV and others) for Japan and other Asian territory. It will be held a day before Tokyo Game Show 2013 event i.e on Sep 18.
The second press conference that Sony has planned is title as "The World Created by Playstation 4", it will be held on September 19. Apart from this no other details was shared, but Sony (Japan) has now finally provided a brief blurb on what the conference will entail, and for Playstation fans its quite interesting.
Interesting that games are "graphically castrated" for launch titles when they still look that nice.
Compare the graphics of TES IV: Oblivion with those of TES V: Skyrim. Same engine, same console yet Skyrim looks a lot better. Or for Xbox360 owners: Gears of War 1 vs Gears 2 and 3. Each iteration looked better than the previous one, all due to the fact that developers increasingly knew how to squeeze every single bit of performance out of the machines.
From a PC gamer perspective the specs in the new console may not be all that impressive, but developers don't need impressive specs to make games look jawdropping. The only reason PC gamers need GPUs like Nvidia's Titan or ATi's 7980 is because PC hardware isn't used efficiently. I'm quite sure developers would be able to come eerily close to photorealism if they were given 5 years to optimise a game running on 16 gigs of ram, a Haswell core i7 processor and an Nvidia Titan.
On September 18 2013 08:02 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So I got a PS Vita now I am reading that these Press Conferences might be Sony unveiling a new redesigned and more powerful Vita. (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Way to be like two weeks behind!
It's not more powerful, though, so unless you haven't been taking care of your screen or you really need it to be an ounce lighter, you don't need a new one.
Head of SCE Andrew House announced during the TGS Sony Conference that the plan is to sell 5 million PS4s “by the end of 2013″. Sony’s Shuhei Yoshida has since clarified that House meant fiscal year 2013 (March 2014). 1.7 million PS3s sold in roughly the same time after its launch.
We previously showed you leaked information confirming voice recognition with the PS4, but Sony tried to distance itself from the news. Now, during TGS, it has once again been confirmed.
The PlayStation Camera will support both voice and facial recognition, with Knack given as an example of a supporting game. Sony’s Masayasu Ito revealed the news, adding “we will never stop evolving PlayStation”.
The PS Camera releases alongside the the PS4 for $59.99, although we should point out that voice support has so far only been confirmed for Japanese and English.
If you slow the video down, there's a few frames of lag on the Vita but nothing utter unusable. If you want a comparison between other streaming devices, Engadget mentions this:
As of right now, it more than stands up to NVIDIA's Shield. If anything, it bests the Shield's streaming performance with zero hitches while we played.
There's definitely a visual hit when you're using the PS Vita TV to play PS4 games. We played Knack, one of the console's flagship launch titles, and though it looked good, there was definitely something a bit off. In a way, it almost looked like we were watching a YouTube video running at 1080p--it was serviceable, and looked good, but had minor tinges of compression.
That's the (relatively minor) bad news. The good news is that it played flawlessly. During our 10-minute demo we experienced no lag whatsoever. It felt as though we were playing a game running on the hardware, not a game being streamed wirelessly to it. So while you're not getting the full-fledged next-gen experience (especially if you're playing using a PS3 controller, as we were), you're definitely getting an extremely solid experience.