Support NeoGAF

[CaptainTiptop]

Just look at the exclusives shown on both platforms thus far. I'm not seeing a 50% difference. I would even argue that X1 has the better looking games at this point.

What Xbone game looks better than inFamous Second Son?

 

[qa_engineer]

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that[s another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

The sarcasm is strong in this one. I give it 12 thumbs up

 

[SapientWolf]

They can talk around it, but the fact is, they're selling a substantially weaker console at a higher price. They better lock down some fan-goddamn-tastic exclusives.

 

[tensuke]

This thread has really turned around my crappy day, thank you for this.

 

[BigDug13]

It's in studios' best interest that there is no clear advantage in one platform over the other... And yet there were clear advantages in a ton of multiplatform games both this gen and last gen.

For just one example of a huge multiplatform title, then PS3 version of Assassin's Creed was crap. How did this negatively affect Ubisoft Montreal?

Yeah I think he's basically saying both games need to really play identically to one another. They're never going to chop features out of a game because the console is less powerful unless the gulf is so incredible that the lesser console is getting the same named game, but it will be completely different. Like the Batman Origins game for 3DS and PSV. Same name, different game because they can't do what the main console game can do.

But what will happen is "easy to do" graphics tweaks on the stronger system and/or leaving horsepower untapped which will cause less (or zero) slowdown in high density action scenes. Either situation favors the PS4.

 

[Hrothgar]

To be honest, at this point it's just getting irritating that after months of discussing the differences between both consoles, this tweet has to be treated as news just because there is still a lot of denial.

 

[Iacobellis]

They can talk around it, but the fact is, they're selling a substantially weaker console at a higher price. They better lock down some fan-goddamn-tastic exclusives.

They will until 2017, then ride it out on Kinect and Halo.

 

[DBT85]

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that's another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

Beautiful.

You should write for DF

 

[opticalmace]

It will help the more informed gamers pick a new console. We've never had a console in recent time that was cheaper and more powerful than its competitor.

Wasn't the Gamecube faster and cheaper than the PS2?

 

[DangerMouse]

Single player looks great. Multiplayer looks like an incredibly hot mess graphically and gameplay-wise. It will drag down its review scores IMO, but the single player game is good looking.

They're two different games of wildly different quality from two different developers being smushed together. It's going to be interesting.

I don't particularly think the single player looks good either myself (but that's just my opinion), but the comparing the graphics to PCs was what I was really getting at.

 

[jordan0386]

Then you would be crazy, Sony clearly has the more graphically impressive exclusives so far.

Please, brother. Just one thread without Killzone .gifs.

Dont give them any ideas.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

lol, this is exciting. I can't wait to see it

 

[velociraptor]

Glad I don't have your PC.

Lol. I'm not even purchasing an Xbox One but if I see a good looking game, I see a good looking game. Ryse looks damn good. Feel free to tell me what PC titles look substantially better? Consider that almost all current-gen titles are basically console ports too.

Here: http://youtu.be/Jtbv7gXkmws?t=2m45s

In some ways, it looks better than The Witcher 2.

 

[2dshmuplover]

Then you would be crazy, Sony clearly has the more graphically impressive exclusives so far.

I really don't think so and I'm not crazy. Remember what Carmack said as well.

 

[Freki]

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that's another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

Hi Major Nelson! Nice to have you on GAF now :-D

 

[Dodecagon]

Someone should make a thread collecting all the quotes.

 

[mrklaw]

I gotta chime in here. Looooong time Halo fan admittedly, but besides KZ2's multiplayer which I thought was excellent, I really can't see any sane person arguing that KZ comes close to touching the Halo franchise overall.

Even after Halo 4?

 

[Skeff]

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that's another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

I like your math kid, your going places

 

[Alienous]

The other posts are I mentioned are just the confirmed specs. Forget what the devs said for just a second, and take a look at the specs. I'm sure whatever devs mentioned the disparity of 50%, when they ran their benchmarks, they found one is around 50% faster which there aren't too many metrics to use for comparison. The key one being framerate or background processing

If one graphics card is faster than another, it's not that confusing.

That a entirely different, and generally game agnostic, thing.

I don't know their comparison metrics, so I would only be guessing. If the claim was "The graphics card in the PS4 performs 50% faster" I could make sense of that, because I could use graphics as a comparison point. However, "The collection of hardware performs 50% faster than this collections of hardware" ... doing what? Across everything it averages out to 50%? It can run its respective OS 50% faster, or stream textures 50% faster, or load objects 50% faster? It can processes data 50% faster, or updates the screen image 50% faster? It can do all of the above, 50% faster?

It just seems like such as strange statement. "The PS4 is 50% faster". Ok, I can understand it being generally better, what does the statistic mean?

Coupled with statements such as the Xbox 360 being 'faster' than the PS3, I have no idea how useful this information is. But that's just me, trying to wrap my head around why I should be excited.

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that's another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

I love this.

 

[Sweep14]

yep, some people here jumps to conclusions really fast. The results Adrian posted ate based on a limited experience of a few months with dev kits.

It works on both sides !

Devs will improve with X1 but they will also improve with PS4 so...

 

[plainr_]

Well, if the PS3 was slower but ended up with the most impressive exclusives, then what happens when you give those same developers the faster system and let them go to work?

We collectively shit our pants.

 

[R3TRODYCE]

ADRIAN!

 

[Ploid 3.0]

KZ3 is garbage, should have played 2.

I noticed I had KZ3 but figured correcting it didn't serve a purpose since he wanted to know if the franchise was like Halo. I mean to put KZ2. Loved it, I was too lazy to get KZ3 right away, then I heard it wasn't as good as 2.

 

[Iacobellis]

Wasn't the Gamecube faster and cheaper than the PS2?

GameCube still got shafted graphically in multiplats compared to PS2. I specifically remember this in Neversoft and EA games.

 

[Casimir]

Dude how the fuck do you navigate reddit.

At the top of the page, right under the "all x comments" counter is a drop down menu to change how the comments are displayed. The standard view for reddit is top (comments that have received the most votes from redditors in descending order). If you're having trouble adapting you can switch it to the same forum format that NeoGaf uses by using the menu to select old. Now the comments will be listed from oldest to newest.

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

I think Adrian should jump into the conversation. He does it all the time in his blogs. Think about it this way. X360 is faster than PS3. Not just easier to program on, it's faster overall (although PS is faster/better in SOME areas). And yet no exclusive on X360 looks like The Last of Us. Halo 4 looks great. Gears blew my mind in 2006. And still, the best looking AAA game of this generation belongs to the supposedly weaker platform.

Ooooh you!

Still funny to see how some people refuse to admit that 360 is faster and better than PS3. This is the first generation ever in wich Sony will have the better hardware, but even so they embrace their revisionism.

 

[Tertullian]

I love it when real industry people post here. It validates my life choices.

 

[netBuff]

I really don't think so and I'm not crazy. Remember what Carmack said as well.

Then you're just a bad judge of graphics. But it doesn't matter anyway, the power difference is real, whether you choose to believe in it or not.

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

Just look at the exclusives shown on both platforms thus far. I'm not seeing a 50% difference. I would even argue that X1 has the better looking games at this point.

KZ:SF Infamous SS rightly destroy anything I've seen on the XBO on a technical level, sorry.

I really don't think so and I'm not crazy. Remember what Carmack said as well.

Carmack made a generalized statement without any actual data/testing to back it up, but it's still something you want to cling to, as opposed to people actually working on the hardware making games.

 

[Harlock]

Go PS4, Go!

 

[Derrick01]

What Xbone game looks better than inFamous Second Son?

You're waiting for someone to post those Quantum Break cutscenes again aren't you?

 

[Kerub]

KZ:SF Infamous SS rightly destroy anything I've seen on the XBO on a technical level, sorry.

I think we need some GIF's to prove your point.

 

[Prelude.]

Ooooh you!

Still funny to see how some people refuse to admit that 360 is faster and better than PS3. This is the first generation ever in wich Sony will have the better hardware, but even so they embrace their revisionism.

2/10. You're not even trying.

 

[BigDug13]

Lol. I'm not even purchasing an Xbox One but if I see a good looking game, I see a good looking game. Ryse looks damn good. Feel free to tell me what PC titles look substantially better? Consider that almost all current-gen titles are basically console ports tool.

I personally don't trust any of these demos from anyone. I feel like the Aliens Colonial Marines fiasco is only the beginning of a generation where games that are shown at expo shows were built just for that show and will look nothing like the finished product.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but all that "scenes are not representative of the finished product" printed on the bottom of that latest Ryse preview. I'm skeptical about all of it until reviews come out.

Only established franchises will get my preorder dollars, like GTAV, inFamous, Halo, Battlefield. Games like Knack, Driveclub, Ryse...I just don't know. I'll wait for reviews on those before buying. It's not like those games will be sold out.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

In before, "But PS2 won with lower specs."

 

[TechnicPuppet]

Sony PR have done an amazing job this weekend.

 

[beast786]

Well, if the PS3 was slower but ended up with the most impressive exclusives, then what happens when you give those same developers the faster system and let them go to work?

 

[jordan0386]

That a entirely different, and generally game agnostic, thing.

I don't know their comparison metrics, so I would only be guessing. If the claim was "The graphics card in the PS4 performs 50% faster" I could make sense of that, because I could use graphics as a comparison point. However, "The collection of hardware performs 50% faster than this collections of hardware" ... doing what? Across everything it averages out to 50%? It can run its respective OS 50% faster, or stream textures 50% faster, or load objects 50% faster? It can processes data 50% faster, or update the screen image 50% faster? It can do all of the above, 50% faster?

It just seems like such as strange statement. "The PS4 is 50% faster". Ok, I can understand it being generally better, what does the statistic mean?

Coupled with statements such as the Xbox 360 being 'faster' than the PS3, I have no idea how useful this information is. But that's just me, trying to wrap my head around why I should be excited.

Anybody can say it. But what the hell does X faster than Y even look like?

 

[2dshmuplover]

What Xbone game looks better than inFamous Second Son?

Comparing open world games I would say Dead Rising 3 looks as good and is pushing an incredible amount of on-screen polys too.

 

[weevles]

Naughty Dog with 50% more power...I like that.

 

[E92 M3]

I really want Xbone to succeed because of my profile and what not, but it looks like I'll be running back into Sony's arms... and this:

 

[HORRORSHØW]

I'm no tech expert or anything, but...

As we all know, a 30% difference between the two consoles is only negligible, as it had been confirmed unanimously by the tech experts of the world. That would essentially mean that the PS4 is only 20% more powerful than the Xbone, because a 50% difference is only 20% above the margin of negligibility (the margin is set at 30%). And since 30% has already been declared as a negligible difference, that would mean that the 20% difference is even less significant - that's another 10% below the margin of negligibility! If anything, this would mean that the Xbone is actually more powerful than the PS4, because 10% below the margin of negligibility would mean that the Xbone is actually 90% above the said margin. In that case, the Xbone would most definitely be 90% more powerful than the PS4!

hahaha. ReverseFate indeed. Love the mathemagics.

 

[velociraptor]

GameCube still got shafted graphically in multiplats compared to PS2. I specifically remember this in Neversoft and EA games.

GC RE4 >>>> PS2 RE4.

 

[BigDug13]

Comparing open world games I would say Dead Rising 3 looks as good and is pushing an incredible amount of on-screen polys too.

Whoa! What? The muddy textures, the lack of colors, the lighting! Are you kidding with this?

It was built for 360 and moved to XBO. It's pretty much NOT going to look anywhere close to Second Son.

 

[Prelude.]

Comparing open world games I would say Dead Rising 3 looks as good and is pushing an incredible amount of on-screen polys too.

What.

 

[Oni Jazar]

I think Adrian should jump into the conversation. He does it all the time in his blogs.

Here I am. So...

1. I am not doing a damage control, but I do want to clarify one thing. But first, yes, devs I know -- and as someone has shown it before in this thread, some other devs already talked about it too -- claim that there's 50% speed difference WHEN DEVELOPING in cross-gen/next-gen PS4/XO games. So there we are, I said it and I stand by it. Notice: WHEN DEVELOPING. It'll become clear in a second.

2. Will this change in the future? WIll devs discover some tricks to narrow the gap? Will stuff like XO cloud computing help? Hell if I know. Uhm, maybe? I know that devs -- well, most of them -- will do whatever they can do get you the best games possible. You're going to see a lot of multiplatform games this next gen, just as you've seen them in this gen, so it's in studios' best interest that there's no clear advantage in one version over the other.

3. Does it mean studios will cripple PS4 versions to match XO ones? Not really, do not underestimate the devs. Even if this happens, you will not know that and that's okay. You've never seen most games in their most powerful form anyway (when we work on them on our ninja dev PCs in 1080p 120fps with all the antialiasings and stuff turned on for shits and giggles). But most of the time devs have a target and they meet this target. If it's a multiplatform game, it's designed with this in mind from the start. So maybe it's not maxing out one console while going 100% on the other. Maybe it's 100% on both, but they take extra time for super-extra optimizations on the weaker hardware to make sure things look the same as on the more powerful platform. Etc. etc.

4. So what is that "one thing" I want to clarify, that some people may consider "damage control", but really is just an explanation. Someone mentioned Titanfall, which looks money and enjoys a great hype. Exactly. A great dev will make a great game no matter what's the hardware. Current gen CoDs looks great and it's 60 fps, on both platforms (well, and PC . To most devs that is just impossible to achieve. And yet...

Think about it this way. X360 is faster than PS3. Not just easier to program on, it's faster overall (although PS is faster/better in SOME areas). And yet no exclusive on X360 looks like The Last of Us. Halo 4 looks great. Gears blew my mind in 2006. And still, the best looking AAA game of this generation belongs to the supposedly weaker platform.

So if you think that the war is over because PS4 is 50% faster TODAY, then you're delusional. This is far from over, and will probably never be over, at least not this upcoming gen.

I read this and think... how awesome the Naughty Dogs and SCE Santa Monica will make PS4 games look.

 

[netBuff]

Comparing open world games I would say Dead Rising 3 looks as good and is pushing an incredible amount of on-screen polys too.

This has to be satire, right?

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Wasn't the Gamecube faster and cheaper than the PS2?

If sony made the GC and didn't pick a small dvd disk they would have been even stronger. GC had the curse of being Nintendo's console. Nintendo thrive, 3rd party don't.

 

[creyas]

I know that pure hardware specs are not the whole story, but man, all next-gen AAA devs I talk to say it's 50% speed difference...

 

[shandy706]

Then you would be crazy, Sony clearly has the more graphically impressive exclusives so far.

You don't have a clue what's going on in Cryengine do you?