michaelpachter
He speaks, and we freak
okay so here's the original bloomberg article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...update-in-push-to-keep-consoles-relevant.html
fucking weird. I know Pachter says some dumb shit but this is pretty incredible.
Yes, in fact, I said that the new processors would be "capable" of rendering at 240 frames per second. I didn't say "FPS", know what a frame is, and know that most movies are shot in 24 frames per second.
It is unlikely that anything will be made in higher resolution than 2 megapixel or run at faster than 60 frames per second, which is pretty realistic, but the new consoles are being built to last past the end of the 1080p display cycle. If we go to 4K display, which I believe is 8 megapixel, they may not have to run faster than 60 frames per second (and the size of game files clearly becomes an issue, regardless), but I believe that the processors can handle rendering faster than 60 frames per second.
You're free to disagree with me, perhaps we'll find out in a few weeks when Sony announces a new console. Although I agree that the viewing experience will not be materially improved at 240 frames per second, I'm pretty sure what I said is right, and that the new consoles will be capable of rendering at that speed.
For what it's worth, I don't think anyone wants to play a game with 5000 independently controlled characters on screen, but I'm pretty sure the new processors will allow some number like that as well. It wouldn't make sense to build that into the game, but I was asked what the difference in processing power would be, and I replied "probably around four times as fast in terms of data as the current generation consoles." When the follow up was "what does 'four times as fast' mean?'", I replied with the faster frame rate or greater number of characters quote.
I'm still amazed that so many GAF members have to be assholes when commenting on things I say.