Support NeoGAF

[Drek]

It's worth noting as well that if this truly is what Microsoft has planned, and it's well received by consumers, Sony has no way of emulating it completely with the memory setup they have chosen without significantly restricting the amount of RAM available to games.

Next gen is going to be really interesting.

That's kind of the point, isn't it?

I mean, this whole thread is about the "4 GB DDR5 > 8 GB DDR3" thing and the "Orbis GPU > Durango GPU" thing, while ignoring that so far well collaborated rumors point to:

1. The Durango only having 5 GB of DDR3 available for games, while the Orbis will have 3.5 GB of DDR5. That more than cuts MS' quantity advantage in half (from 4 GB to 1.5 GB). 1.5 GB isn't going to mean shit against DDR5.

2. Many rumors have said that the Durango has 2 or 3 cores restricted entirely to the OS, while the Orbis is only supposed to keep one away from developers.

The Orbis wins in a hardware v. hardware match-up. When you factor the performance cost of a large OS that gap only widens.

Sony is betting on hardware and first party/exclusive games. MS is betting on convergent media and 3rd party games being 1. the market leaders and 2. relatively similar across both platforms. It is a legitimate deviation between the two in terms of strategy, even though they're both sourcing much of the silicon from AMD.

The only real wild card in this equation is Sony's scaling OS implementations. They've done some pretty impressive things with the Vita's OS. It runs a very small footprint in-game but thanks to some fancy OS design minimizes games without closing them, greatly reducing their memory consumption and allowing access to other applications and features. Even still, that isn't a totally seamless transition, just a passable facsimile. That might be enough for Sony. It really depends on how big media convergence really is in the next 5-10 years, and that might largely depend on how well MS can market the Xbox 720 along with other Windows 8 devices.

 

[Biggzy]

Nintendo magic? Lol, is this something like the "special sauce" of Durango?

More like magic mushrooms seeing it's Nintendo.

 

[Reiko]

Fine, if you want to ignore the leaks we have seen so far and sit there waiting for Merlin to "knock one off" in Durango's direction, go ahead pal...

I really don't care either way. But you can continue with that angle if it makes you happy

 

[NBtoaster]

Also no way in hell MS will let multiplats be night and day, if it's true that ps4 can do 60fps and next box will do 30fps they won't let that happen. PS4 will just end up with a gimped version.


So yea it will come down to First Party to prove the TRUE strengths of each system.

It optimised cases the difference shouldn't be 60fps versus 30fps. There will be CPU bound games, and parts of the GPU that aren't that much faster on Orbis. But even this gen has had a difference of 20fps or more between 360 and PS3 versions in less than optimised scenarios, so there could be big differences in a lot of ports.

 

[deadlast]

so are we back to comparing apples and oranges again?

 

[HollovVpo1nt]

That's kind of the point, isn't it?

I mean, this whole thread is about the "4 GB DDR5 > 8 GB DDR3" thing and the "Orbis GPU > Durango GPU" thing, while ignoring that so far well collaborated rumors point to:

1. The Durango only having 5 GB of DDR3 available for games, while the Orbis will have 3.5 GB of DDR5. That more than cuts MS' quantity advantage in half (from 4 GB to 1.5 GB). 1.5 GB isn't going to mean shit against DDR5.

2. Many rumors have said that the Durango has 2 or 3 cores restricted entirely to the OS, while the Orbis is only supposed to keep one away from developers.

The Orbis wins in a hardware v. hardware match-up. When you factor the performance cost of a large OS that gap only widens.

Sony is betting on hardware and first party/exclusive games. MS is betting on convergent media and 3rd party games being 1. the market leaders and 2. relatively similar across both platforms. It is a legitimate deviation between the two in terms of strategy, even though they're both sourcing much of the silicon from AMD.

The only real wild card in this equation is Sony's scaling OS implementations. They've done some pretty impressive things with the Vita's OS. It runs a very small footprint in-game but thanks to some fancy OS design minimizes games without closing them, greatly reducing their memory consumption and allowing access to other applications and features. Even still, that isn't a totally seamless transition, just a passable facsimile. That might be enough for Sony. It really depends on how big media convergence really is in the next 5-10 years, and that might largely depend on how well MS can market the Xbox 720 along with other Windows 8 devices.

Man, Durango sounds even more inferior now

 

[SneakyStephan]

Not talking pure control, but they do have some influence, I think it was posted in one of these next gen threads the whole "if the title isn't on some form of equal playing field as it is on it's competitors then they won't allow it on 360"

Thats a very very ROUGH jist of it so don't take it as word.

As if MS would do this... and if they were that stupid then Sony could say the same and not accept purposly gimped games on their console.
And then someone internally gets tired of this bullshit and leaks this info to the public and both the communities get pissed off.

Imagine the games junnalism headlines : PS4 has been receiving downgraded ports because of microsoft bullying developers. (I'm also pretty sure theres some laws preventing this kind of thing after what intel did to amd with their OEMs ten years ago)

 

[TheGreyHulk]

I find it funny how people are arguing over specs that do not matter in the long run. The era of hardware is over, and software is all that matters right now. The 2 specs are comparable enough that any visual discrepancies will be unnoticed by about 80% of the people out there.

I think if people can play their favorite games, and easily, it'll be fine. The generational leap is already pretty extraordinary. Games will look beautiful on all consoles. Sit back and watch the majesty that will come and bless us all.

True. The general public won't notice. They're not going to look for tiny details at all. They're still amazed by current gen.

 

[XtremeXpider]

That's kind of the point, isn't it?

I mean, this whole thread is about the "4 GB DDR5 > 8 GB DDR3" thing and the "Orbis GPU > Durango GPU" thing, while ignoring that so far well collaborated rumors point to:

1. The Durango only having 5 GB of DDR3 available for games, while the Orbis will have 3.5 GB of DDR5. That more than cuts MS' quantity advantage in half (from 4 GB to 1.5 GB). 1.5 GB isn't going to mean shit against DDR5.

2. Many rumors have said that the Durango has 2 or 3 cores restricted entirely to the OS, while the Orbis is only supposed to keep one away from developers.

The Orbis wins in a hardware v. hardware match-up. When you factor the performance cost of a large OS that gap only widens.

Sony is betting on hardware and first party/exclusive games. MS is betting on convergent media and 3rd party games being 1. the market leaders and 2. relatively similar across both platforms. It is a legitimate deviation between the two in terms of strategy, even though they're both sourcing much of the silicon from AMD.

The only real wild card in this equation is Sony's scaling OS implementations. They've done some pretty impressive things with the Vita's OS. It runs a very small footprint in-game but thanks to some fancy OS design minimizes games without closing them, greatly reducing their memory consumption and allowing access to other applications and features. Even still, that isn't a totally seamless transition, just a passable facsimile. That might be enough for Sony. It really depends on how big media convergence really is in the next 5-10 years, and that might largely depend on how well MS can market the Xbox 720 along with other Windows 8 devices.

oh please, we still don't know the final memory usage in Durango and orbis.

 

[CrunchinJelly]

so are we back to comparing apples and oranges again?

No, we're back to Durango being a DVR with an OS that needs 3GB RAM.

Or it might just be wishful thinking from some.

It is shaping up to be one powerful DVR.

 

[Insane Metal]

I bet Durango will have between 6-7GB of RAM for games. There's no way whatever it's going to run, is gonna eat up 3GB.

 

[Reiko]

oh please, we still don't know the final memory usage in Durango and orbis.

Give it up. Lock it down. Xbox DVR 720 is the future for media with gaming thrown in.

Orbis is the future for games.

 

[Pistolero]

I don't care either way but part of me almost wishes Microsoft trumps Sony hardware wise, just to enjoy the carnival of tears!

 

[Deadly Joker]

I would have thought neck & neck sales would have the opposite effect. If a big named title like GTA or Final Fantasy had an obvious performance advantage, I doubt a console manufacturer would risk alienating the publisher by getting out a rule book and risk a defection.

It seems to me it would only work with the small fry.

This is off-topic, but I have to ask: Does the PS3 actually have DVR capabilities? And it records and plays back video using the same HDD that games are installed to? Wouldn't this impact the performance of games, especially ones that do a lot of just-in-time asset streaming?

I ask because I've always been skeptical of the Durango-as-DVR idea, due partially to those same (disk contention) concerns. Are they really not an issue? I guess since Sony lets you throw just about any HDD in there, perhaps developers know they can't expect any particular level of performance from them.

For what it's worth, I've been using DVRs since the original TiVo came out in the '90s, and I have been using a whole-house DVR setup (Windows Media Center) for about 5 years. (All "TV" is streamed to various 360s throughout the house.) I also do most of my web surfing on my living room TV. (The afore mentioned WMC PC.) So I'm totally on board with the whole DVR/media hub... thing. I'm happily drinking that Cool-Aid. And yet, shoving all that functionality into one $400 box just seems dumb to me. If you try to do too many things, you risk being crappy at all of them. (IMO) To be fair, it is a cheaper solution, by far.

It seems like MS might be ceding the "hardcore gamer" to Sony, purely on the hope of enticing people with a bunch of functionality that is probably best left to dedicated devices. (Tablets, PCs, and DVR/media-servers)

Or, more likely, perhaps these so-called leaks are not very accurate.

Ding Ding Ding.

 

[abadguy]

True. The general public won't notice. They're not going to look for tiny details at all. They're still amazed by current gen.

Hell i'm still amazed by what devs are pulling off on 6 and 7 year old hardware. Which is why all the hyperbole about Durango being so "weak" is funny to me. Even if Sony does have the more powerful console , Durango is hardly a Wii U like jump. Games are going to look amazing on both consoles.

 

[Drek]

This is off-topic, but I have to ask: Does the PS3 actually have DVR capabilities? And it records and plays back video using the same HDD that games are installed to? Wouldn't this impact the performance of games, especially ones that do a lot of just-in-time asset streaming?

I ask because I've always been skeptical of the Durango-as-DVR idea, due partially to those same (disk contention) concerns. Are they really not an issue? I guess since Sony lets you throw just about any HDD in there, perhaps developers know they can't expect any particular level of performance from them.

Yep. In Europe it's called PlayTV, in Japan it's a slightly different peripheral called Torne. Both basically amount to a dual tuner card that plugs into the PS3's USB port and saves directly to the PS3's internal hard drive regardless of what you're currently doing.

The tuner boxes sell for ~$100 USD equivalents and run on 5v of power, so not real likely they put much processing power in the box. It's basically want you'd have to include with any tuner.

That's not what Microsoft's recruitment pages are saying.

Yep, because MS is just going to outright advertise their entire corporate philosophy in job postings.

I think that MS should really worry about their console specs.. Sony's first party talent made their exclusives look noticrably better on PS3 while the difference in capabilities between 360 and PS3 is negligible. Imagine the difference in visual quality if Orbis is indeed significantly more capable than Durango.

Sony's first party games did look better on the PS3. They also generally sold worse than Halo and Gears iterations, not to mention dozens of major 3rd party releases.

The performance bump PS3 first party titles had didn't mean shit last gen. For the gap between Orbis and Durango to really matter this generation Sony would either need to hit first party releases out of the park or have the dominant 3rd party IPs show a significant performance gap. Given that most 3rd parties have proven themselves more than willing to program to the least common denominator, the later at least seems like an unsafe bet.

 

[XtremeXpider]

Ding Ding Ding.

Yes, Microsoft ceding the hardcore to sony, that's why they are making some next gen (core) games. Lol.

 

[Ding-Ding]

Ding Ding Ding.

It took me a second there to cotton on but I love it!!!

 

[Reiko]

Lowest common denominator is funny.

When it leads on 360 it's because 360 is LCD.
When it leads on PS3 it's because porting from 360 to PS3 was disastrous.

Most games nowadays lead on PS3... So PS3 is LCD?

 

[Wynnebeck]

Yes, Microsoft ceding the hardcore to sony, that's why they are making some next gen (core) games. Lol.

And? Microsoft's not going to want to piss off their Xbox fanbase by not giving them some games to hold them over. Placate the masses and then push your media box afterwards.

 

[TheOddOne]

The problem I have with much of the reasoning, while some spot on, is that they lose me because they seem to be so sure that it is one or the other. It's never both. Hardly balanced, I would say.

 

[Biggzy]

Yep, because MS is just going to outright advertise their entire corporate philosophy in job postings.

When said positions are for 'Core Publishing' and 'to make the next AAA core franchise' in the case of Black Tusk Studios, you don't have to be a genius to deduce that these games are not for your 60 year old Nan.

Microsoft has no intention of giving away the 'core gamer' to Sony and lose the billions of dollars the group brings in the process.

 

[Pistolero]

Console warriors are simply blowing things out of proportions. Even if the latest rumors were true (Specs listed for both...), we would be looking at minor differences. I fail to see how anyone in his right mind would call Durango - the one constructed from those bits and pieces, accepted for the sake of argument- weak. People naively think that the battle will be decided upon two-three random numbers, when advertising, pricing, exclusivity deals, online and services, and accessories-peripherals will matter much, much more...

 

[Drek]

oh please, we still don't know the final memory usage in Durango and orbis.

Last I checked none of the info we're currently working with is truly known. By your argument we might as well speculate on what it'd be like if the PS4 had Nvidia's Titan in it and the Xbox 720 has two ATi 7970's running in crossfire.

Multiple rumors point to MS currently having a 3 GB OS footprint, hoping to reduce it further but no guarantees to that end. Multiple sources also say the Orbis locks up only 0.5 GB away from games. Maybe all these sources are wrong, maybe MS does get their OS down to the ~1.5-2 GB target, helping to give back some of that memory, and maybe Orbis does get a bump to 8 GB of ram in some way. But the currently "known" speculation points to the aforementioned numbers.

True. The general public won't notice. They're not going to look for tiny details at all. They're still amazed by current gen.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it'd be tiny details or won't be noticeable by the general public. If the gap is as big as currently suggested it'll be noticeable for sure.

The real question is given that 3rd parties will program specifically for multi-platform releases with minor tweaks one way or the other based on lead platform will the difference really matter, even if people can see it?

There is no way anyone couldn't notice the difference in resolution with CoD versus Battlefield, but that didn't stop CoD from crushing it in sales and online community. System power needs to either 1. produce a massive gap or 2. allow some kind of new gameplay innovation for it to be the deciding factor in a consumer's choice. Otherwise it's a nice tie breaker, but software, price point, and other features will still win.

This is why Sony is clearly betting heavily on their 1st party studios for PS4.

 

[KidBeta]

Console warriors are simply blowing things out of proportions. Even if the latest rumors were true (Specs listed for both...), we would be looking at minor differences. I fail to see how anyone in his right mind would call Durango - the one constructed from those bits and pieces, accepted for the sake of argument- weak. People naively think that the battle will be decided upon two-three random numbers, when advertising, pricing, exclusivity deals, online and services, and accessories-peripherals will matter much, much more...

50% increase in flops is not what I would call minor

 

[Reiko]

Last I checked none of the info we're currently working with is truly known. By your argument we might as well speculate on what it'd be like if the PS4 had Nvidia's Titan in it and the Xbox 720 has two ATi 7970's running in crossfire.

Multiple rumors point to MS currently having a 3 GB OS footprint, hoping to reduce it further but no guarantees to that end. Multiple sources also say the Orbis locks up only 0.5 GB away from games. Maybe all these sources are wrong, maybe MS does get their OS down to the ~1.5-2 GB target, helping to give back some of that memory, and maybe Orbis does get a bump to 8 GB of ram in some way. But the currently "known" speculation points to the aforementioned numbers.

I really don't think the final specs of the OS will tally at 3GB. But if you really believe that... Speculate away

 

[Karak]

Console warriors are simply blowing things out of proportions. Even if the latest rumors were true (Specs listed for both...), we would be looking at minor differences. I fail to see how anyone in his right mind would call Durango - the one constructed from those bits and pieces, accepted for the sake of argument- weak. People naively think that the battle will be decided upon two-three random numbers, when advertising, pricing, exclusivity deals, online and services, and accessories-peripherals will matter much, much more...

I am more interested, once they get made how the changes might impact the games. A couple devs and various programmers here have stated that we are talking a pretty small measure of difference. 8AF versus 16AF 2xAA versus 4Xaa and that's about it.

 

[XtremeXpider]

Ding Ding Ding.

Last I checked none of the info we're currently working with is truly known. By your argument we might as well speculate on what it'd be like if the PS4 had Nvidia's Titan in it and the Xbox 720 has two ATi 7970's running in crossfire.

Multiple rumors point to MS currently having a 3 GB OS footprint, hoping to reduce it further but no guarantees to that end. Multiple sources also say the Orbis locks up only 0.5 GB away from games. Maybe all these sources are wrong, maybe MS does get their OS down to the ~1.5-2 GB target, helping to give back some of that memory, and maybe Orbis does get a bump to 8 GB of ram in some way. But the currently "known" speculation points to the aforementioned numbers.


I wouldn't go so far as to say it'd be tiny details or won't be noticeable by the general public. If the gap is as big as currently suggested it'll be noticeable for sure.

The real question is given that 3rd parties will program specifically for multi-platform releases with minor tweaks one way or the other based on lead platform will the difference really matter, even if people can see it?

There is no way anyone couldn't notice the difference in resolution with CoD versus Battlefield, but that didn't stop CoD from crushing it in sales and online community. System power needs to either 1. produce a massive gap or 2. allow some kind of new gameplay innovation for it to be the deciding factor in a consumer's choice. Otherwise it's a nice tie breaker, but software, price point, and other features will still win.

This is why Sony is clearly betting heavily on their 1st party studios for PS4.

And there are rumors about <3GB but those don't count, I guess.

 

[Drek]

When said positions are for 'Core Publishing' and 'to make the next AAA core franchise' in the case of Black Tusk Studios, you don't have to be a genius to deduce that these games are not for your 60 year old Nan.

Microsoft has no intention of giving away the 'core gamer' to Sony and lose the billions of dollars the group brings in the process.

Of course they aren't just going to walk away completely. But will they pay the big premiums for exclusives like Gears and Mass Effect this generation? Are they going to fund new IPs through the multiple iterations it normally takes to become a major franchise or will they bail like they did to every other first party series they've made other than Halo and Forza? Are these teams going to really have AAA budgets, or are they going to have something more modest?

Its a lot of unknowns, that comes with MS shuttering so many studios and making so few core gamer first party games over the life of the 360. That isn't a concern with Sony, they've already made that investment. Doesn't mean MS won't, just that we have very little reason other than MS' claims they still care.

 

[Karak]

Of course they aren't just going to walk away completely. But will they pay the big premiums for exclusives like Gears and Mass Effect this generation? Are they going to fund new IPs through the multiple iterations it normally takes to become a major franchise or will they bail like they did to every other first party series they've made other than Halo and Forza? Are these teams going to really have AAA budgets, or are they going to have something more modest?

Its a lot of unknowns, that comes with MS shuttering so many studios and making so few core gamer first party games over the life of the 360. That isn't a concern with Sony, they've already made that investment. Doesn't mean MS won't, just that we have very little reason other than MS' claims they still care.

True enough. However there is now the opposite. Many studios created, bought and paid for by MS. So the question now really is what are they making and where does MS see themselves recouping the massive money they spent since 2010 putting these devs together. Either Acti or EA once spouted out some numbers for even a small dev to open and make a AAA game for this gens systems and it was in the millions. So there is that as well.

Like you say it will depend on the budget. Then again it makes very little sense spending millions putting a dev together only to give them 10 dollars to make a game.

 

[DopeyFish]

Console warriors are simply blowing things out of proportions. Even if the latest rumors were true (Specs listed for both...), we would be looking at minor differences. I fail to see how anyone in his right mind would call Durango - the one constructed from those bits and pieces, accepted for the sake of argument- weak. People naively think that the battle will be decided upon two-three random numbers, when advertising, pricing, exclusivity deals, online and services, and accessories-peripherals will matter much, much more...

50% increase in flops is not what I would call minor

according to flops alone... This is the closest gen since PSX - N64

 

[Deadly Joker]

Yes, Microsoft ceding the hardcore to sony, that's why they are making some next gen (core) games. Lol.

Read my post again.

 

[BobTheFork]

They're banking on the ps2/wii formula I guess. Seems like they really did lose their edge this gen. Assuming these numbers are true at least.

No, I think they are banking on users with a 360 are going to buy the next MS platform no matter what. If they can make the Durango have a full extension of existing account history (achievements and downloaded content) then I don't see a ton of people switching.

Sony feels like they need to give people a reason to change over so they are putting more power in the Orbis. I don't think it will matter at all. The early console purchases will do mostly the same as this generation IMO and then maybe it swings later on.

 

[Biggzy]

Of course they aren't just going to walk away completely. But will they pay the big premiums for exclusives like Gears and Mass Effect this generation? Are they going to fund new IPs through the multiple iterations it normally takes to become a major franchise or will they bail like they did to every other first party series they've made other than Halo and Forza? Are these teams going to really have AAA budgets, or are they going to have something more modest?

Its a lot of unknowns, that comes with MS shuttering so many studios and making so few core gamer first party games over the life of the 360. That isn't a concern with Sony, they've already made that investment. Doesn't mean MS won't, just that we have very little reason other than MS' claims they still care.

Judging by a job description last year - I can't remember exactly when - it contained that Microsoft has $300 million earmarked for new game projects, so I say the chances are quite high.

 

[KidBeta]

according to flops alone... This is the closest gen since PSX - N64

Flops can be used to compare hardware when the architecture is practically identical which has only happened this gen, so pointing out hat flops didn't show shit in the past is invalid because in the past architectures have been massively different there hasn't been a gen with hardware this similar ever before. People need to realise this.

 

[Ding-Ding]

Read my post again.

Give him a clue...

Ignore the content of the quoted posts XtremeXpider and the penny will drop.

 

[DopeyFish]

Flops can be used to compare hardware when the architecture is practically identical which has only happened this gen, so pointing out hat flops didn't show shit in the past is invalid because in the past architectures have been massively different there hasn't been a gen with hardware this similar ever before. People need to realise this.

so it only works as a metric when it works in your favor, eh?

btw try to quantify a game that looks 50% better. do it. especially when you have resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two systems.

 

[Reiko]

Flops can be used to compare hardware when the architecture is practically identical which has only happened this gen, so pointing out hat flops didn't show shit in the past is invalid because in the past architectures have been massively different there hasn't been a gen with hardware this similar ever before. People need to realise this.

I also remember both thuway and Proelite saying flops won't tell the true story with these new consoles.

But hey, you have seriously convinced yourself that you see whatever you want to see.

 

[Karak]

Judging by a job description last year - I can't remember exactly when - it contained that Microsoft has $300 million earmarked for new game projects, so I say the chances are quite high.

Correct and it was 300 million earmarked for first gen new game projects/series and development. Which, if they run a business like well...businesses, it will be above 300 million going forward.

I also remember both thuway and Proelite saying flops won't tell the true story with these new consoles.

But hey, you have seriously convinced yourself that you see whatever you want to see.

Well even some of this forums own devs and a couple others have stated that, as it stands, you wouldn't be seeing 30 on one and 60FPS on another. Or anything even close to that huge.

 

[KidBeta]

so it only works as a metric when it works in your favor, eh?

btw try to quantify a game that looks 50% better. do it.

? Whats that mean only when it works in my favour ? Eh I've never said anything about using flops to compare for last gen and previous do what are you on about ?

 

[KidBeta]

I also remember both thuway and Proelite saying flops won't tell the true story with these new consoles.

But hey, you have seriously convinced yourself that you see whatever you want to see.

Proelite you mean the guys who banned ?

Great source

 

[DopeyFish]

? Whats that mean only when it works in my favour ? Eh I've never said anything about using flops to compare for last gen and previous do what are you on about ?

it's because it's absolutely cherry picking.

again.

how would you quantify a game that looks 50% better with resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two platforms with close to equal shading performance? (50% improvement, as you'd say if all CUs were doing shading)

 

[Reiko]

Proelite you mean the guys who banned ?

Great source

thuway is also banned. He's a great source too.

 

[phosphor112]

Nintendo magic? Lol, is this something like the "special sauce" of Durango?

Double post! F**k!

No, just logic that does specific things. What? We don't know yet.

 

[KidBeta]

it's because it's absolutely cherry picking.

again.

how would you quantify a game that looks 50% better with resolution, textures and geometry at parity between the two platforms with close to equal shading performance?

You wouldn't, and I don't see how it's cherrypicking , flops are quantifiable that's we use them, and it's got 50% more easy maths and for most people to understand (most)

 

[Biggzy]

Correct and it was 300 million earmarked for first gen new game projects/series and development. Which, if they run a business like well...businesses, it will be above 300 million going forward.

I just hope MS invests that money wisely in some top quality games that knock everyone socks off, because that way everyone wins.

 

[Reiko]

Correct and it was 300 million earmarked for first gen new game projects/series and development. Which, if they run a business like well...businesses, it will be above 300 million going forward.


Well even some of this forums own devs and a couple others have stated that, as it stands, you wouldn't be seeing 30 on one and 60FPS on another. Or anything even close to that huge.

Amazing how we go from dev saying both consoles will be a wash in power to that performance gulf. lol

 

[DopeyFish]

You wouldn't, and I don't see how it's cherrypicking , flops are quantifiable that's we use them, and it's got 50% more easy maths and for most people to understand (most)

so you wouldn't be able to quantify it? just making sure we are on the same page.

 

[SirButterstick]

50% increase in flops is not what I would call minor

I remember Flopz being the BIG THING in the late 90s / early 00s when the new G4 line came out from Apple. The mo' things change, the mo' they stay the same.

 

[Biggzy]

I remember Flopz being the BIG THING in the late 90s / early 00s when the new G4 line came out from Apple. The mo' things change, the mo' they stay the same.

Flops are the new bits.