So what is Sony strength to you?Software isn't Sony's strength. We will see.
So what is Sony strength to you?Software isn't Sony's strength. We will see.
Sony fanboys are funny. Before this rumor 8GB DDR5 was all the rage and XBOX One was getting murdered for only using 5 of 8 GB for games. Now Sony does it and all of a sudden those same people are saying that if true it's more than enough anyway? Wow.
edit: I play both PS and XBOX. Just pointing this out.
About 90% of gaming side.
Looks like Sony cares as much about it being a multi purpose device as Microsoft. Shocker that a company cares about a broader audience than just a niche.
Why would he? Account registered in 2009, only two posts, in this same thread...That's a whole lot of lurking...
Software isn't Sony's strength. We will see.
Sony fanboys are funny. Before this rumor 8GB DDR5 was all the rage and XBOX One was getting murdered for only using 5 of 8 GB for games. Now Sony does it and all of a sudden those same people are saying that if true it's more than enough anyway? Wow.
edit: I play both PS and XBOX. Just pointing this out.
Are games not software?
MS managed to implement these functionalities with just 32MB of RAM, much less of what Sony reserved for the OS. Thus, memory reservation wasn't really the problem I guess. It was probably hardware related.
Pretty close to impossible yes. You would hit GPU and CPU limits far earlier then 6 GB of RAM. 8 GB is overkill compared to the GPU and especially CPU used in the PS4. It will take years before devs are going to find ways to use it efficiently and when that time comes the PS4 OS will be optimized enough to give devs all the RAM they need. Until then 5 GB is plenty, for most devs it will still be too much to even use.
The same people were also disgusted that anyone would ever think of paying money to play online. We had threads here daily calling out people as morons for ever paying for online. Now that Sony's doing it also those threads seem to have disappeared....
That seems a little off. Not seeing ANY jaggies.
Wow, a lot people here made me ashamed of having the "Junior Member" banner under my nickname....
So is this what a "Carnival of Stupid" is?
Because the numbers are likely not finalized yet. Sony made a pretty big judgement error back in 2006 at this same juncture in the PS3's development, and were too aggressive with the amount of RAM they allocated for games.
The end result was that they weren't able to include things like parties, x-game chat, a fully functioning XMB in-game, etc. I would guess that a lot of the same people shitting egg rolls over yesterday's news complained about the lack of those features during the PS3's life cycle. They want it both ways, but that's not how the world works, kiddies.
Are games not software?
Could you please link to that post? I'd like to see it.They confirmed and clarified the "flex" memory. The numbers are what are still up to debate but we have a Bish approved insider who has already said that the numbers from DF are wrong as hell.
This is stupid if it doesn't change.
If PS4 sells more (which is gauranteed at this point) developers would start utilizing the extra ram making the PS4 the ideal version in nearly every aspect.
Bad move Sony. :-(
Give developers 6 GB, you don't need to hog this much.
That seems a little off. Not seeing ANY jaggies.
You know, when the console specs were first announced, i actually cared about all this. Now, im completely indifferent. I played BF3 on 360 this morning and im still impressed by those graphics and thats using 512mb so i know i wont be disappointing with next gen regardless of the amount of ram used.
Serious question: How would GAF feel if the ram available to devs was 6 GB? Roboplato?
Its already more than half for games which I am fine with so that's icing on the cake.Serious question: How would GAF feel if the ram available to devs was 6 GB? Roboplato?
S¡mon;73210371 said:Show me a 10-line program which eats up 8 GB of RAM, please.
Serious question: How would GAF feel if the ram available to devs was 6 GB? Roboplato?
Could you please link to that post? I'd like to see it.
UPDATE:
welp...
They cut their OS requirement from 120 MB to 50 MB and you believe they still somehow didn't have enough room for cross game chat, parties, and functioning XMB in-game?
Your question is worded pretty strangely.
But there really is no "memory manager" that a developer could write. It's always the OS that manages memory. What this is, is a virtual address space.
Serious question: How would GAF feel if the ram available to devs was 6 GB? Roboplato?
The same people were also disgusted that anyone would ever think of paying money to play online. We had threads here daily calling out people as morons for ever paying for online. Now that Sony's doing it also those threads seem to have disappeared....
GAF would bitch that it should be 7.
If 7 was available they would bitch that it should be 8, and that there should be no OS.
The same people were also disgusted that anyone would ever think of paying money to play online. We had threads here daily calling out people as morons for ever paying for online. Now that Sony's doing it also those threads seem to have disappeared....
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
MS managed to implement these functionalities with just 32MB of RAM, much less of what Sony reserved for the OS. Thus, memory reservation wasn't really the problem I guess. It was probably hardware related.
They cut their OS requirement from 120 MB to 50 MB and you believe they still somehow didn't have enough room for cross game chat, parties, and functioning XMB in-game?
The same people were also disgusted that anyone would ever think of paying money to play online. We had threads here daily calling out people as morons for ever paying for online. Now that Sony's doing it also those threads seem to have disappeared....
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
Weren't you the same guy swearing up and down that Sony was done for not having backwards combality ?
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
I just got this feeling,
this feeling in my feathers,
that only a Dr. Bird would get,
That it's 6 GB .
justmyopinion mang.
Actually I am pissed Sony are charging for online. However I have no choice, I don't want to game on PC and both nextgen consoles charge for online play, so I have to go for the cheaper option, PSN+ is cheaper than Gold and of course the system is cheaper than Xbox One. I blame Sony for charging for online, but I also blame the people who payed for Gold too.
Do you know things or is this speculation?
At face value I can see how it looks that way, but what changed my mind were the developer reactions relayed by some of the insiders here. If this is a non-issue to developers, more than enough memory for the time being, and game quality won't suffer at all because of it, then it really isn't all that important. If it was the other way, like, "we only have 5GB of RAM so we had to drop X, Y and Z from our game" then it would be an obvious problem.
If I had to take a stab at what I think the real numbers are I would say:
- 6GB Game RAM allocation
- 1.5GB OS allocation
- .5GB "flex" RAM
Of course, this is straight from a Goomba's ass so don't quote me on it.
Yeah I was. But I was assuming that Microsoft was going to have full backwards compatibility.
I don't remember developers complaining about lack of RAM on the XB One though but that didn't stop people from piling on the system for lack of RAM. Now it's ok though for Sony to have the same thing. Just interesting.