Baki
Member
Sonys first party efforts last gen were technically impressive. Just look at what Sony Cambridge put out or the Getaway. Not to mention jak and dexter and god of war.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
[Eurogamer\DF] Orbis Unmasked: what to expect from the next-gen PlayStation.
- Thread starter Saty
- Start date
Sonys first party efforts last gen were technically impressive. Just look at what Sony Cambridge put out or the Getaway. Not to mention jak and dexter and god of war.
Gemüsepizza
Member
No we won't. NPCs / items etc. in memory like in Skyrim may be a problem with a 2x256 split RAM configuration, but at 3500 MB RAM such problems do not exist anymore.
Those cutscenes were unparallelled for their time.
Final Fantasy X had realtime cutscenes like Silent Hill 3. But the LOD management and chess piece animations on some characters were jarring.
eso76
Member
Can't answer that, sorry.
I've only streamed stuff through wi-fi so far, and i don't think that would work for 1080p. Haven't tried though. I did stream a few 720p .mkv videos, they worked like a charm.
Sanctuary
Member
FFX was the first thing that came to mind when trying to recall something that I'd already seen on the PS2 that was similar. It was also one of the very first games; so maybe if they had as many years to work with the system as what Konami had prior to SH3 you would have seen better results. I don't know how the dev teams worked back in those days, but it's pretty common now for companies as a whole to share their overall technical experience from one team to another, or simply asking for help from someone who is known to be good at something, even if they aren't specifically tasked with that project.
Kingdom Hearts 1&2 would be the more appropriate comparison then.
But there's still LOD issues in those cutscenes too.
Can Crusher
Banned
Pulling the Junior card is unbecoming. But I'll bite...
If ND and GG were able to squeeze that much blood out of the stone that is the Cell and that shitty split memory architecture. Imagine what they will do with the raw power they are going to have now.
So tell me how my comment about devs that take advantage of more powerful hardware than PS3 produce better lookings games than Sony's first party studios warrants a response like that?
Where was I saying that if given more powerful hardware Sony studios wouldn't be capable of delivering more?
If I didn't say that, why twice did you attempt mockery? It looks bad on you.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Technically everything in this leak is secret. I'm pretty sure devs no whatever it is though.
Can Crusher
Banned
Audio DSPs should be a lock I guess (for both consoles). Whether that's special sauce, or just vanilla sauce I don't know man.
Secret PS3 game is actually built into PS4 hardware.
opticalmace
Member
A family of hamsters.
yup
Underwhelming specs? 4GB of ram isn't really something I think is future proof, open world games are going to have problems a la PS3 no?
Durango is using 8GB minus OS (which just can't be 3GB, that's just too much)
And after reading that the PS4 version of Planetside 2 would need some adjustments and removal of some effects...bleh.
Can somebody put my concerns to rest?
Durango is using 8GB minus OS (which just can't be 3GB, that's just too much)
And after reading that the PS4 version of Planetside 2 would need some adjustments and removal of some effects...bleh.
Can somebody put my concerns to rest?
Stop taking incomplete/incorrect specs as gospel.
Can Crusher
Banned
Devs think it's a big jump, one even thinks a quantum leap. Let's trust in them, and what little of next gen has been shown.
Sanctuary
Member
Despite the LOD issues, FFX still had some damn impressive cutscenes for such a comparatively early game. What made it somewhat annoying though was how Square still insisted on combining prerendered scenes with in game engine rendering.
I want to see real time rendering on the new systems that looked as good as the prerendered scenes in FFX. We will probably see it too, or at least something extremely close to it (I remember when the PSX was doing prerenders, and I was wondering how long it would be until we saw those from an in game engine).
Also, this 4GB whining is ridiculous. Even today most modern PC games don't even use 4GB of ram, and they still have the OS to contend with. 4GB for a dedicated gaming machine is plenty large.
Then again most video cards are sitting at 1GB minimum of Vram, and I don't know what the equivalent of that is for the PS4 architecture.
Jeez, why people continues to think 4GB of GDDR5 are comparable/worst to 8 GB DDR3? It's really ignorant & stop to use Crytek claims for that, what has said Crytek is generic & incomplete about the RAM.
velociraptor
Junior Member
Sony should really add 2GB DDR3 extra I think. 4GB isn't enough.
Agreed.
Based on what?
Where was that said about Planetside 2, out of curiousity?
Re. RAM, I think 4GB is this gen's 512MB. Bethesda went from Morrowind to Skyrim on the same type of jump. Indeed, the PS3->PS4 jump will effectively be bigger than Xbox->360 given the woes Bethesda had with PS3's memory architecture.
Can Crusher
Banned
There's no right way to look at it right now. TFLop vs Tflop, RAM vs RAM, Special Sauce vs Secret Sauce...
Each of us looks at it and draws conclusions. His reasoning that 8GB of ram vs 4 GB of ram is completely different than yours, yet he doesn't seem any more wrong.
grimshawish
Banned
No. PS4 RAM is about double(?) the speed of the 720's.
Am on the assumption that any OS over say 225MB for the Durango will start to put it behind the Orbis. Not the case for all games, am just talking about the general effect.
Am also under the assumption that open world games are just expanded versions of what you get in a linear game. They all have their needs and the open world feature just means some things have to be scaled back.
Planetside 2 meanwhile is a different matter; its not that things are getting removed as such but the game needs to be optimised to the device. Only certain PCs will get it running at full pelt, the PS4 won't have the graphics card for that game I'd suggest (?).
Meanwhile you'll see exactly the same on Durango.
But who knows, maybe am being unfair on Durango but as it stands it seems very messy and like a big trade off for that OS has been made.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
Ps4 has 8x more ram than the ps3. and it's the fastest money can afford.
Sounds impressive to me.
Sounds impressive to me.
specialguy
Banned
compared to last gen it's 8x. i mean sony is reserving the entire ps3 ram just for the os, to put it in perspective.
and xbox is 16x, i guess ram is the one spec we were not remotely let down in.
Sanctuary
Member
I really don't see how 4GB of faster ram vs double that of the slower is going to make a huge difference either way in an open world type of game. It just means the faster ram will have to be dumping it's cache more often, but it shouldn't matter at all. It's not like a single game would be using all of a system's ram for one location. For most games I'd rather have faster ram anyway vs a larger amount. It makes it easier to work with across more genres.
Not that I think this is at all necessary because GDDR5 is really fast, but wouldn't it be a huge boost (and dirt cheap) for Sony to just throw in 1GB of DDR3 to handle the OS so that all 4GBs of GDDR5 could be used for games?
For nothing, with all respect. 8 GB of RAM not means anything, especially at half speed. & edram doesn't solve this issue magically, remember of the tiling; you can't state something like 8 GB it's all when even you don't know the rest of specs, not has sense.
velociraptor
Junior Member
Based on Durango.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Thing is... what little of next gen has been shown was shown on hardware that's 60-70 percent faster than what's rumored to be in ps4. So it isn't representative at all.
something fishy
Member
They are but they are just a few of many talented studios. Sony have no monopoly on that.
Not sure you understand how ram works. Especially this type of ram.
We're missing a significant piece of the puzzle if a dev in this thread is saying both will actually be on par. Nevermind we are missing a huge piece of the Orbis chunk as well.
Really sucks so many of you are hung up on raw numbers rather than what those numbers mean exactly.
8>4 in the world of computing tech doesn't necessarily hold true nor does it tell the whole story.
Let's say best case scenario is that Durango allocates 6 GB for games. The much faster Orbis ram can help offset raw size differences by swapping faster.
And thats not to speak of games that won't even utilize the full 4GB pool (3.5GB) let alone 6 or 8. In those cases, Orbits will have a fantastic advantage here.
8>4 in the world of computing tech doesn't necessarily hold true nor does it tell the whole story.
Let's say best case scenario is that Durango allocates 6 GB for games. The much faster Orbis ram can help offset raw size differences by swapping faster.
And thats not to speak of games that won't even utilize the full 4GB pool (3.5GB) let alone 6 or 8. In those cases, Orbits will have a fantastic advantage here.
something fishy
Member
My modest pc runs it full pelt easily.
Seems not only Durango has compromises if we are honest,
I'm thinking that neither machine will take much forward for a PC gamer but both will have great games.
I was not one of them. I expected around 6-8 gddr3 ram. of course people call you crazy whe you say stuff like that.
Can Crusher
Banned
Well you can't state 4 GB of ram is better than 8GB of ram just because it's faster. We really will have to wait to see what's better. Devs will show it, Devs will talk about it, we will know.
Until then, it being better for us...I mean how can we even say that? It is true that Crytek wants 8GB, we will see how that goes for example. Settling the matter in our heads means nothing for the real world.
Devs knew the target specs, so we shall see. If it's a shit jump, there's always PC (and Oculus Rift is coming).
It's this the point.
I'm not saying 4 GB double faster of 8 GB are superior but realistically talking will be quite on par. You really overstimate the PR Crytek sensationalistic claims. Most of the time is so generic that not means anything, I remember something about Avatar in real time for the next generation or Crysis 2 is like CG on console time ago.
JonathanPower
Member
This would be huge if true. The PS4 would be a real monster then and Durango seems like it's going to suffer due to slow ram.
No amount of RAM can prevent Bethesda incompetence. So don't worry there.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
You're right, but insiders here have said/hinted that Durango has something that is so good Microsoft are suggesting to third parties that it would match a 680 in the real world.
I really want to know what the magic thing is.
JonathanPower
Member
Well, if the rumors of Durango overbloated OS are true this means Durango is going to have only 6Gb for games, and thus 4GB of DDR5 at 192GB/sec. are much better than 6Gb of DDR3 at 68Gb/sec. in my opinion.
Yeah but now rumors are suggesting that PS4 has some additional task-specific hardware.
Knowing Orbis is the only without official numbers leaked yet, we can only hope for the better too.
GHG
Gold Member
This.
And paired with a netbook CPU, its really not that impressive from the point of view of the spec sheet.
Don't get me wrong, these rumored components will be great for things like price, heat, noise, power consumption and if arranged correctly, reliability. It will be interesting to see the size of these consoles because I think for one of the few times, we will have console boxes that are smaller than their previous-gen counterparts. In a closed platform, I'm sure developers will be able to do a lot with the hardware and quickly due to them being instantly familiar with the architecture. We'll end up seeing some impressive games, no doubt about that, but the hardware is not exactly bleeding edge.
This is a stark contrast to the previous generation when the Cell was nothing like anyone had ever seen before. Of course the con of this was the fact that developers had a hard time getting to grips with it, but in terms of theoretical peak power, it was a monster at the time and it had everybody saying "wow".
Of course, the dynamics of the gaming market have now changed. The competition from Microsoft is fierce, so there is a fear that if they don't keep things simple they could be left behind early on in the new generation. Of course, the economy is different as well, a $600 console would get nowhere in today's market (of course, the die-hards would still buy it but thats about it). Also, more significantly, the PC platform is more profitable than ever for developers with the digital distribution platform taking off. This means that developers want to be able to make games across multiple platforms, including the PC at reduced dev costs. That is exactly what these new consoles (if the rumors are correct) will give them.
So yeh, all in all, its very logical and it makes sense, but its not all that exciting. From day-one, most mid range PC's should be able to outperform these boxes on exactly the same games. And this time, there's no "untapped" power to play with. It just all seems a little "safe".
Horse Armour
Member
Why are people arguing about RAM amounts and CPU clocks? The main disappointment here is the weak GPU sported by both the machines. They should both at a minimum have gone for something with the power of an overclocked 7870.