Support NeoGAF

[ksdixon]

call me paranoid, but i don't like the fact that microsoft were in-line to give publishers the box they wanted, one that restricts used games etc. surely there is some loyalty from certain publishers and microsoft? such as ea.

i would suspect that most 3rd parties work to the lowest common denominator and port across, so that they can maximize profits by releasing on two platforms - rather than pushing the advantages of PS4 etc.

 

[turk3y]

This is true.

They (who probably won't by a PS4) won't change their mind at any given fact or circumstance.

or some folks actually think that graphics are not the single most important factor within a game?

 

[Crimson_Gold]

That is subjective

The argument is subjective from both sides. Now the argument based on the number of announced games could be more objective.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

YES!

We just found the new talking point Microsoft fans are going to use.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

How dense are you wanting to be? I'm being serious??

Do you not grasp the concept of how game development works?

Developers are not going to be maxing out the hardware day one. In fact many are going to be running last gen engines uprezzed to next gen. Or early next gen engines not fully optimized for the next gen hardware. Sure the differences may and probably will show on some titles. However given the facts above it is very likely that the games will not be fully utilizing the consoles hardware in their launch titles and thus parity is more likely because the title won't be pushing the hardware to its limits. Furthermore given the constraint of time and resources to meet launch its possible that the weaker console could even have a game or two that looks better if time and resources were heavily focused on the weaker platform over the more powerful one. However as games begin to get more optimized and the limits begin to come into focus one console is easier to optimize on and has a higher ceiling in most areas. Thus why later titles will more clearly show the differences unless they are intentionally gimped.

Personal attacks now? Classy.

As for the rest of what you wrote, excuses.

 

[EmptySpace]

You guys are looking at it wrong. It's not about intentionally gimping the PS4 version (eg downgrading it) so much as it is moving development and resources over to getting other versions of the game to meet the said target instead of polishing up the PS4 version to beyond it.

Really depends on what the target even is, and whether at this stage it's one that set at a comfortable level for both to achieve parity, one obviously much easier than the other.

exactly. it is about not taking advantage of the ps4 vs. downgrading/gimping it. as long as the devs feel that one version is acceptable, they are not going to add more particle effects or cram in more details even if the console is fully capable of it.

 

[QaaQer]

Edge is paid by Sony:

No it was after the 180.

It went to press before the 180 and could not be changed according to the Editor-in-chief.

 

[Stealthcobra]

Proof is in the pudding. PS3 was supposed to make 360 look like Xbox 1.5.

We all know how that turned out

This is the dumbest rebuttal. The cell made the ps3 hard to program for thats a fact. Its a fact the ps4 does not have the cell. So that statement you made is null abd void. First party games looked better than anything the 360 was doing... Period.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Obviously $ony is paying all these publications and developers to say these things, typical sony tactics. They did the same for PS3, I don't believe any of this.

/s

 

[Jonm1010]

call me paranoid, but i don't like the fact that microsoft were in-line to give publishers the box they wanted, one that restricts used games etc. surely there is some loyalty from certain publishers and microsoft? such as ea.

i would suspect that most 3rd parties work to the lowest common denominator and port across, so that they can maximize profits by releasing on two platforms - rather than pushing the advantages of PS4 etc.

Loyalty is going to go out the window pretty fast if Sony is the leader in all territories and by a large margin.

 

[Derrick01]

Albert Penello, Major Nelson - where are you?

Assembling the tech fellows.

Proof is in the pudding. PS3 was supposed to make 360 look like Xbox 1.5.

We all know how that turned out

With the big PS3 exclusives looking a big step ahead of 360 games?

 

[Majanew]

It's funny who thinks that Xbox One is doomed because of less power. That's irrelevant for overall market, is all about the games.

I don't care what the "overall market" thinks. And I don't care about the stupid "the most powerful console doesn't always win" nonsense, either. Neither of those affect me. I'm buying multiplats on PS4 because I'm pretty confident they will look and/or run better. If a game looks or runs better on Xbox One? I'll buy it on my Xbox One.

 

[Finalizer]

I've read the contradictory article thanks.

It's not contradictory. It readily states that, while there's a power disparity, at this point there's plenty of reasons for developers to not leverage it. It even goes on to state there's ways MS themselves can lessen the gap going forward.

That's not contradiction; that's explanation.

 

[maquiladora]

Woah.

 

[Polo67]

Some of you guys are looking at it wrong. It's not about intentionally gimping the PS4 version (eg downgrading it) so much as it is moving development and resources over to getting other versions of the game to meet the said target instead of polishing up the PS4 version to beyond it.

Really depends on what the target even is, and whether at this stage it's one that set at a comfortable level for both to achieve parity, one obviously much easier than the other.

Give us another one of your analogies

 

[Jack cw]

Because developers and publishers are partial to sales and if you release a gimped PS4 title against a non-gimped PS4 competing product you'll get killed.

That is totally true, and I hope that the PS4 versions will show their supriority from the begining but by letting the PS4 version run equal to the Xbone version wont kill them any sales. Its only as good as the lowest common denominator. I am confident that games from EA and Ubi soft will perform better, with more effects, better fps and higher res but to show a difference reltaive to the theoretical power gap will take some time.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

reminds me to read that misterxmedia blog, entertaining and the comment section is priceless

 

[thetrin]

Proof is in the pudding. PS3 was supposed to make 360 look like Xbox 1.5.

We all know how that turned out

Silly comparison. What held PS3 back was how unique the hardware was, and how hard it was to develop for. PS4 is straight up a PC.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Honestly, I don't get the 'the disparity will become more obvious over time', it makes no sense. That was true last generation because the PS3 was more difficult to program for. This generation the PS4 is much easier to program for. Hence, assuming that the developers for each are of equal skill and improve equally well over time, we would expect the PS4 to pull away more quickly because the ease of development, then the Xbone would close the gap somewhat towards the end of the generation as they get more used to the more complex architecture.

If you look at both in parallel and how (based on dev statements) it's easier to work with he PS4 then you can see how that will kind of be the parallel for years to come. Especially with 1st party dev.

 

[hwy_61]

Albert Penello, Major Nelson - where are you?

No one will listen to Major Nelson, rightfully so, because he's a PR guy.

As for Panello, hasn't he come on GAF several times to discuss XBONE?

 

[REV 09]

The roles have switched guys, get used to it

ps3 is more powerful than 360 though. I still think the price difference matters more than the power difference.

 

[Krilekk]

Nobody has to gimp anything, they will just develop for X1 for 1080p/30 and the game will run at a rock solid 30 fps on PS4 when they port it. If anybody expects multiplatform games to target PS4 first and then spent even more ressources on getting it to work acceptable on X1 they are out of their mind. X1 became the target platform the day the specs became public, you won't see the difference in games except for some compute effects. Exclusives are a different story but Quantum Break looks great. As does The Order. Couldn't tell which one is more next gen. Tearing on X1, smooth 30 fps on PS4, that's the only difference you'll get.

 

[Finalizer]

Microsoft won't allow devs to release better PS4 multi plat games

Publishers are not beholden to manufacturers.

Or do you really believe that MS will threaten the makers of GTA, Call of Duty, and Fifa for the sake of platform visual parity? It's MS that's making sure games are published on their platform, not the other way around.

 

[betterman]

....and the price.

it's all about one hundred bucks

 

[NotXbox one]

We just found the new talking point Microsoft fans are going to use.

isnt this what the article is saying or you take what you want and deny the rest ?

 

[TRios Zen]

At it's core, this thread says what many people have already known, power wise, PS4 > Xbox One. Nothing too inflammatory I think.

However if the scope of the difference is as big as Edge claims, I would expect noticeable differences early on that would only grow as this coming generation aged. At zero optimization, PS4 is stronger, at full optimization PS4 is significantly stronger. So the only way that Xbox One could achieve parity now would be if their optimization was ahead of the PS4, which is NOT what we are hearing. The assumption of course is that there truly is such a wide gulf between the two.

 

[Stealthcobra]

exactly. it is about not taking advantage of the ps4 vs. downgrading/gimping it. as long as the devs feel that one version is acceptable, they are not going to add more particle effects or cram in more details even if the console is fully capable of it.

Your logic is so heavily flawed. If this were true than pc counterparts would just like console games. However in most instances the pc game looks better. Why make pc games look better? For example arkham asylum.. Looks better on pc, per your logic it should look just like the console game.

 

[rakkadakka]

Remember guys, Edge has no editorial interest in PS4 coming out on top.

 

[Audible Phonetics]

I must say any developer that purposely limits a game developed for the PS4 to make sure there's parity with a weaker system deserves to be "castrated". That it total BS.

 

[EmptySpace]

Silly comparison. What held PS3 back was how unique the hardware was. PS4 is straight up a PC.

ps4 setup is actually better than pc. customized gpu, extra bus, unified memory, cpu/gpu same die.

 

[Mr_Appleby]

Of course. That is kinda the point.

Optimization does not necessarily mean what you think it means.
You cannot squeeze more performance from something when it is not there. You tone down LODs, reduce res, create lower detailed meshes, turn off some sampling, etc...

This is especially true now that they are basically all using the same hardware.

Well yes but often you prove a concept first then refine the execution. Some things like reordering the draw sequence can have huge impacts by changing how often you need to perform expensive operations, eg. Binding to a shader program each time you draw an object that uses it vs binding once and drawing all uses in one batch. Or using fast custom math functions, designing data structures for locality of access, effective parallel distribution of tasks and so on.. not so much making more power out of nothing but making more effective use of what you do have.

Yes I'm 7 pages late.

 

[ksdixon]

Loyalty is going to go out the window pretty fast if Sony is the leader in all territories and by a large margin.

but the wii was still largely ignored despite it being a runaway profit console, right?

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

isnt this what the article is saying or you take what you want and deny the rest ?

Did i say it wasn't true? I said "this is the new talking point microsoft fans are going to use" from now on.
It was a jab at how some posters cling to very specific arguments, not a jab about whether it's true or not.

 

[tinfoilhatman]

I look forward to seeing games on PS4 that actually show the power gap, right now I'm seeing launch games that look about equal or worse(both directions) in some cases.

With the big PS3 exclusives looking a big step ahead of 360 games?

I realize it's subjective Show me a PS3 game that's a "big step" over Halo 4

 

[Radec]

or some folks actually think that graphics are not the single most important factor within a game?

But we're talking about graphics and performance here.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

You guys need to actually read the article.

So there's an 40%+ power gap in almost every spec category but the difference won't be obvious on day 1?

 

[Jonm1010]

Personal attacks now? Classy.

As for the rest of what you wrote, excuses.

No at this point it's an observation.

Those aren't excuses, they're explanations of the process of making games, extremely simplified. You seem incapable of understanding that software developers are not some magic genie that exploits all hardware day one. How old are you? Is this your first launch? If not try and go back to the ps2 era and remember how people pointed out that most ps2 titles looked no better or worse then many Dreamcast titles. Was that because ps2 was less powerful? No, it was because the hardware was new and not fully optimized, exploited and understood by developers yet and time and resources are often more strained to meet a launch date due to shorter development time, the learning curve of new hardware and thinner resources because most companies still are supporting the previous gen heavily.

The fact you are still posting the same drivel from your first post obviously indicate reason, logic and facts are lost on you.

 

[Drek]

That is totally true, and I hope that the PS4 versions will show their supriority from the begining but by letting the PS4 version run equal to the Xbone version wont kill them any sales. Its only as good as the lowest common denominator. I am confident that games from EA and Ubi soft will perform better, with more effects, better fps and higher res but to show a difference reltaive to the theoretical power gap will take some time.

How would it not hurt sales? People like pretty games. If you release an un-optimized least common denominator title into a popular genre with competing optimized titles you're going to get trashed unless you have a strong brand backing you up, and even then you're going to deteriorate the brand to at least some extent.

No one wants to make a game that looks good "for an Xbox One game" when that bar and the bar for the PS4 are set at two different levels. That is no way to make a break out hit or maintain a top tier franchise. The motivation to be technically competitive on every platform is incredibly significant and not something you can buy out on a large enough scale to be relevant.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

It's not contradictory. It readily states that, while there's a power disparity, at this point there's plenty of reasons for developers to not leverage it. It even goes on to state there's ways MS themselves can lessen the gap going forward.

That's not contradiction; that's explanation.

Sure it is. It's also a good excuse to keep talking about some mystical potential power when the consoles launch rather than what is right there in plain sight.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

"market excitement" is not the issue. ps2 was weaker than gamecube and xbox yet ps2 sold the best because of its game lineup. N64 was significanly more poweful than playstation yet sold less because playstation had a better game lineup.

I'm not sure what parallel universe some of you are from.

Are you serious? Market excitement is what led to the massive adoption rate of the PS2 Goomba. When they showed MGS2 it put the last nail in the coffin for the dreamcast even though not one launch game on PS2 looked better than the Dreamcasts lineup. At that point it didn't matter because gamers were convinced it was the more powerful
platform.

N64 and Xbox released a year after their competitor! They lost cause of time! Their graphical superiority is the only thing that game them a fighting chance. Both of them had a extremely successful launches because of M64 and Halo two games that visually outclassed the competition. However, like you said they could not maintain that momentum because the games weren't there because they were released A YEAR LATE.

Perceived power of the consoles is extremely important. Why do you think bullshots and CG video are the bane of this industry. Use your head.

 

[PopcornMegaphone]

I don't consider the difference between 900p and 1080p to be a big deal. Particularly for gamers who sit on a couch several feet away from their TV. 10 FPS differences are a bit more annoying, however.

 

[Ninja Dom]

So how does the Wii U now compare to Xbox One after this news?

 

[Hanmik]

So there's an 40%+ power gap in almost every spec category but the difference won't be obvious on day 1?

it´s already obvious here.. this thread moves 40%+ faster than a thread with "good" Xbox One news.

 

[DieH@rd]

I can't, I'll suffocate on hype. Then I remember that QD tech demos usually look worse than the final product and my mind boggles a little more.

Dark Sorcerer demo was described by QD as the baseline for the nextgen games. They still have a lot of room for finding more performance.

HQ download http://www.gamersyde.com/news_the_dark_sorcerer_full_demo-14342_en.html
...shame there is no 2-3GB version.

 

[Canis lupus]

It went to press before the 180 and could not be changed according to the Editor-in-chief.

 

[Audible Phonetics]

How would it not hurt sales? People like pretty games. If you release an un-optimized least common denominator title into a popular genre with competing optimized titles you're going to get trashed unless you have a strong brand backing you up, and even then you're going to deteriorate the brand to at least some extent.

No one wants to make a game that looks good "for an Xbox One game" when that bar and the bar for the PS4 are set at two different levels. That is no way to make a break out hit or maintain a top tier franchise. The motivation to be technically competitive on every platform is incredibly significant and not something you can buy out on a large enough scale to be relevant.

It doesn't seem to hut sales for game release PC counterparts? The Logic is extremely flawed.

 

[TheRealTalker]

Whats done is done mates just look to the ever promising future!

Spoiler

 

[Gurish]

Guys instead of jumping at some out of context quotes,have you read the closing paragraph??:

The difference between cross platform launch window games will be small, and improved graphics drivers plus the power of the cloud might yet tip the balance in Xbox One’s favour. Nonetheless, at launch, PS4 will be the more capable console.

So over time according to this the power gap should even favour the XBONE,what the hell??

 

[szaromir]

I must say any developer that purposely limits a game developed for the PS4 to make sure there's parity with a weaker system deserves to be "castrated". That it total BS.

And the devs that were limiting 360 versions to be on par with PS3 also deserved to be castrated?

However if the scope of the difference is as big as Edge claims, I would expect noticeable differences early on that would only grow as this coming generation aged.

I expect the opposite to be true. The low level architecture is the same (CPU units, shader units etc), it's the memory setup that's more complicated on Xbone that limits the performance if badly used. Once devs grasp how to use it more efficiently, the performance gap will diminish, though obviously will remain rather obvious.

 

[GodofWine]

Look, if ps4 outsells xb1 by the margin that it probably will, developers arent going to castrate anything. MS couldnt write checks big enough to curtail it, since their 'investment' wouldnt be made up through game sales, due to a lower install base, just doesnt work.

and

PS4 first party stuff would shine over 3rd party stuff making them look bad..when bad looking devs spend big money to make a game and dont move units on the leading console, bad looking devs dissapear.