FunkyPajamas
Member
uh-oh.popcorn.jif
uh-oh.popcorn.jif
What the fuck are you even saying?It's brutal in here for any Microsoft employee. The change in policy most certainly did not change the amount of blood in the water and the general level of bile directed towards everything Microsoft says and does. No matter what Microsoft does from here on out, it won't be enough. Even if they removed the mandatory Kinect, lowered the price, and (somehow) found a way to increase the performance of the Xbone, it wouldn't matter. Battle lines have been drawn and most rationality/civility has gone out the window.
Come on klaus, you're being so disingenuous. You admitted in the other thread after moving the goal post several times that basically nothing will be good enough for you before the games aren't out there that take full advantage of the hardware and you agreed that would be 2014 or 2015.Ah now we're already at far weaker. Yesterday I had a lot of fun asking people for proof (apart from stupid numbers / funny graphs that tell very little of the full story) for this claim (and I'm not arguing the PS4 will be more powerful).
Funnily enough, I'm still waiting for any kind of solid confirmation - the Gaffers I have seen the last few weeks were... quite forthcoming with digging up stuff that made the One or MS Execs look bad, strange that they should fail at this mundande task.
Fucking hell Amirox is taking names. Bang on the money though
Come on klaus, you're being so disingenuous. You admitted in the other thread after moving the goal post several times that basically nothing will be good enough for you before the games aren't out there that take full advantage of the hardware and you agreed that would be 2014 or 2015. So fuck that.
What the fuck are you even saying?
That would change a lot.
It would still be met with distrust because they tried to fuck the consumer, but that would be an amazing move for everyone.
Haha Y2Kev was frustrated yesterday by the persecution complex on display in a Xbox thread, too.
Good post Amir0x. It seemingly needs to be repeated over and over again that people shit on the companies if they make shit decisions and just because Sony hasn't made a major shit decision lately this place isn't overly hostile to it.
(If any reader craves that hostility: check out the Vita threads.)
Ah now we're already at far weaker. Yesterday I had a lot of fun asking people for proof (apart from stupid numbers / funny graphs that tell very little of the full story) for this claim (and I'm not arguing the PS4 will generally be more powerful).
Funnily enough, I'm still waiting for any kind of solid confirmation - the Gaffers I have seen the last few weeks were... quite forthcoming with digging up stuff that made the One or MS Execs look bad, strange that they should fail so far at this mundane task.
Btw perhaps you can find some quote that shows where I moved goalposts or agreed on anything regarding 2014 / 2015? Thanks a lot.
To which I replied with a graph to show the relative specification of the two system as they are 1:1 due to being on the same architecture.klaus said:That's the one thing that I'd like to have a quote / proof from a reliable source for. So far all I've heard and seen is that the systems are pretty comparable, apart from silly numbers..
klaus said:Well thanks for the graph, but perhaps I wasn't clear in my post: all I would like to see is factual proof of better results - that's the thing I'd like to see. Numbers / graphs tend to be boring, even if they (pre)tend to be informative..
benny_a said:Unfortunately we don't have results yet. End of 2015 it should be obvious that the PS4 is significantly stronger.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=67267266&postcount=2666klaus said:Yes I agree with that.
It's amusing that you make this post just after another post that calls out the persecution complex of many Xbox fans
"Persecution complex" is a nice term to hide behind, but these last couple of pages are quite evidently filled with genuine frenzied persecution; even outside observers have already commented on the community's recent bloodlust so trying to present it as a figment of someone's imagination comes off as rather cynical.
Xbox 360 was my primary console of choice last gen, as it was for many others jumping ship to PS4.
We simply have to protect our best interests, and I could not care less which company helms the ship provided they are currently aligned with my consumer interests.
To me, it is great that they changed course, but because of the level and severity of their betrayal of consumers, I have to wait until the generation is deep into its run before I know whether Microsoft will attempt to change things back. I am simply looking out for my best interest.
To which I replied with a graph to show the relative specification of the two system as they are 1:1 due to being on the same architecture.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=67267266&postcount=2666
At first numbers weren't good enough. Then a visual explanation to the less technical inclined with a relative graph wasn't enough. Then it was changed to results that are only available at the end of 2015 and that was enough, because they can't be delivered.
This was all in addition while AandATech and DigitalFoundry stuff was posted that has authority figured that are not on GAF repeat the same thing that were said in that thread.
You're being disingenuous and everyone who read that thread actively knows it. So I repeat once more: Fuck your post.
I don't know who you asked, but such comparisons have already been done before countless times on websites and on NeoGAF (there have even been pretty graphs!). Of course everyone will define "far weaker" as something different than the next person, but there seems little doubt that the gap is considerable - much larger, relatively speaking, than the theoretical gap between PS3 and 360, and perhaps more similar in nature to the gap between Xbox and PS2. If you want someone to do a spec-by-spec analysis, I can try to dig up some of the great ones that have been done on NeoGAF for you (because, I am not an engineer and have only a basic grasp of the nitty-gritty of technology, and therefore go to trusted NeoGAF sources for my information on what matters and what does not and how it will impact the games. Part of being an informed consumer!).
"Persecution complex" is a nice term to hide behind, but these last couple of pages are quite evidently filled with genuine frenzied persecution; even outside observers have already commented on the community's recent bloodlust so trying to present it as a figment of someone's imagination comes off as rather cynical.
Why should they bother? Because it's about keeping consumers informed. "Letting the games speak for themselves" alone is highly suspicious as it is for any platform that hasn't released yet: game engines are highly underdeveloped as devs/pubs rush for launch window, the power of both systems aren't even close to being tapped due to the predominance of cross gen ports and relatively fewer exclusives that have really begin to dig under the hood.
Example of why this is important ->
Up until February 21, almost every dev - including all of Sony's first party devs - thought the platform was going to have 4GB of GDDR5. They were all working on engines that understood that inherent limitation. Now they're suddenly working with DOUBLE that. Do you think 'letting the games speak for themselves' is adequate then? Of course not.
Same is true if Microsoft really did improve any specs we don't know about yet.
Who cares if you personally don't see a reason for it. You've admitted that you're not knowledgeable about the subject and dismiss other posters that are. So why would your uninformed opinion be the barometer?Perhaps my wording was bad, but some people claim the PS4 to be much stronger than the One, and I simply don't see any reason yet why that should be clear.
Yes, sounds like a smart career move. Attach your name and company to such a statement.Common sense (and playing video games since over 30 years) tells me a much stronger system should have anything to show its prowess besides numbers (or how bout some multiplat devs that openly confirm the supposed big difference), even when it's still a few months til launch - but yeah fuck my post. Or even better: ignore me if you have a problem with my questions.
Edit: Congrats also on the selective quoting ^^
Common sense (and playing video games since over 30 years) tells me a much stronger system should have anything to show its prowess besides numbers (or how bout some multiplat devs that openly confirm the supposed big difference), even when it's still a few months til launch - but yeah fuck my post. Or even better: ignore me if you have a problem with my questions.
Who cares if you personally don't see a reason for it. You've admitted that you're not knowledgeable about the subject and dismiss other posters that are. So why would you uninformed opinion be the barometer?
Yes, that's a really impressive demo. I hope we will get a game that gets close to that quality on the PS4 - would blow my mind tbhRegarding the bolded, did you see this video? This is all running in real time on PS4 hardware, using the developer's PS3 tools no less. I haven't seen anything close to this running on Xbox One hardware.
The other thing to note about the bullshit of letting the "games speak for themselves" -- it is kind of hard to do that when a majority of your games are running on FUCKING desktop PC's with modern, high-end graphics cards. (I am referring to Microsoft at E3)
The other thing to note about the bullshit of letting the "games speak for themselves" -- it is kind of hard to do that when a majority of your games are running on FUCKING desktop PC's with modern, high-end graphics cards. (I am referring to Microsoft at E3)
I
Thanks for the answer. Well sorry to be the asshole who is always nitpicking, I am not that interested in specs (= numbers = grahps), for a) I'm also not an engineer and b) I have experienced way too many of those spec battles (all the way back to the bit wars), and tbh my conclusion is I'm more interested in results / cool demos than silly numbers. And yes there already should be results (perhaps the Demo by QD, that was quite impressive) confirming the "big" difference - we're not far away from launch and especially the PS4 is way further along with the devkits / tools from what I hear. Well but you are right, the definition of "far weaker" is ofc no objective measure..
Haha what?
It's E3 and everyone is scrambling to make launch. Out of the things to get up in arms about, this is a pretty low priority since we'll be able to judge them in the wild in 5 months.
Just to address a couple qualification questions, since there is confusion. My profiles are pretty public, so it would be hard for me to come and lie about who I am or what I do.
As stated, I run Product Planning. My group reports into Marc Whitten, on the engineering side. You can see that was updated in 2009. PRIOR to that, I was in Product Marketing. In my entire time at Xbox (I started a year before we launched V1) Ive worked really closely with the Hardware teams regardless of which group Ive reported into.
Neither of those groups are PR, for what it matters. Marketing is not the same thing as Public Relations.
I have done lots of interviews in the past (not too hard to find me) and at no point have I worked in PR. As Ive also stated Im doing this on my own time. I have only commented on topics around interviews I have done, or occasionally where someone has asked a clarifying question around something we have announced. For reasons that are obvious, I cant disclose a lot of things. I have tried to clarify around things weve announced when I can.
I didnt feel like that was doing PR but some here feel that way. I was never intending to get into the debate only to clarify the intent behind some of the statements made in the interview.
Anyway, I poked in to clarify a bit what I meant in the article, hopefully it clarified for some.
Whether MS fu**ed up elsewhere is irrelevant: the guy is largely correct imo. The difference on paper between these two machines will not be directly proportional to the difference visually in the vast majority of games.
The difference in price, however, is key. It's hugely disproportionate when looked at in conjunction with the consoles respective hardware specs. PS4 looks to much better "bang for buck" wise.
PR is a part of Marketing.In fairness, Marketing and PR are interchangeable terms to most here.
For those who don't know the difference
Marketing is the business of introducing consumers with your products and convincing them why they should buy them.
PR is the business is building a dialogue with your customers to foster brand loyalty.
While the original comments cannot really be classed as either Marketing nor PR, Alberts presence here is, even if it is on his own time.
Whether MS fu**ed up elsewhere is irrelevant: the guy is largely correct imo. The difference on paper between these two machines will not be directly proportional to the difference visually in the vast majority of games.
The difference in price, however, is key. It's hugely disproportionate when looked at in conjunction with the consoles respective hardware specs. PS4 looks to much better "bang for buck" wise.
Don't you agree that "bloodlust" was partly responsible for MS reversing it's XB1 policies?"Persecution complex" is a nice term to hide behind, but these last couple of pages are quite evidently filled with genuine frenzied persecution; even outside observers have already commented on the community's recent bloodlust so trying to present it as a figment of someone's imagination comes off as rather cynical.
The lynch mob is out for blood, it's truly embarrassing.
Eventually, we'll get those big games that demonstrate the difference in power, but I am unsure why you'd completely reject the illustrative potency of a straight spec-to-spec comparison. It does matter, as far as I can tell, it has always mattered...
PS. Someone remind me, was TITANFALL!!!!! running on actual Xbone hardware?
Agree.
Althought technically PS4 has more power than Xbone launch and first year games could look similar but pretty sure after second year that will change, Just want to know what ND can do with the PS4 (Last of Us is a wonder in the PS3).
No one can deny the + power that the PS4 has , Also this time (compared to PS3) Sony made a developer oriented machine so we wont have to wait to the end of the generation to see the graphicall difference.
I'm a little confused by what you want. You seem to just want a big showcase game that demonstrates how the PS4 is more powerful. And yet, even platforms that are demonstrably weaker in power for years often receive a title that surprises people for what they're doing with the hardware (example: ShenMue 1/2).
So, one of the worst ways to compare the power of a system would be to simply pick a showcase game and compare: this by nature forces so many variables into the mix that it automatically kills any possible objective comparison.
For an example of how, I'll list some of the variables that must then come into play once you use this as the only metric:
● The difference in time between when a developer/publisher got a dev kit (In other words: If Company A gets a dev kit a full year before Company B, then company A is far more likely to be further ahead in its engine prep/R&D and will be producing superior results.)
● The difference in relationship between the dev/pub and the console manufacturer (this matters because it starts to mean things like the difference between communication when you're having issues; the level of help you're likely to receive; the tools you have access to)
● The difference in core competency among teams (for example, if a team at CryTek got a handle of an X86 architecture platform, they're likely to be far ahead in their ability to produce superior visual displays than, say, Atlus)
● The actual technical variance among the platforms (already being discussed)
Whereas, if we can compare the specs, we know what each system should theoretically be capable of, and the only thing we're waiting for is someone to deliver on that promise.
Another issue with just expecting a visual indicator at this point is, again, how much was being finalized this year with teams. As I indicated early, most devs - including Sony's first party devs - thought it'd have 4GB of GDDR5 right up until the Feb 21 reveal. Suddenly being opened up to 8GB at that final moment is almost like being struck with a lightning bolt - it immediately opens up a world of possibilities, almost all of which are going to be impossible to implement in a meaningful fashion before an E3 reveal. Same goes true of any changes MS is making.
Eventually, we'll get those big games that demonstrate the difference in power, but I am unsure why you'd completely reject the illustrative potency of a straight spec-to-spec comparison. It does matter, as far as I can tell, it has always mattered...
That post is really helpful, thanks for taking the time to bring my point into a well written and concise statement (sometimes a thing I'm not very good at, plus english not being my first language doesn't really help..).
Indeed this (i.e. the results we can experience) is the metric I almost exclusively rely on - even though I put a lot of my work time into getting the best out of a given hardware / system and appreciate technical advancements, at the end of the day all that (imho) matters is what the consumer has on his screen. And ofc this makes comparisons way harder (for exactly the points you made, plus there are also things like quality of developer tools / documentation, and the respective consumers' personal tastes regarding art style, novelty, effects like bloom / lensflares etc.), and that's why I personally agree (up to a certain point) with the statement that pure hardware analysis is meaningless. Yes you can (and most probably will) get better results with stronger hardware, but I firmly believe there are tons of other important factors that we do not know of (or perhaps are not assessing properly), that simply stating "machine x is much more powerful than machine y because it has more FLOPS, GBITS & whatnot" just doesn't do it for me. When a machine consistently shows better results, then I am willing to agree to that statement.
And yes, PS4 undisputably has clear advantages in the core specs, and yes the Dark Sorcerer demo is really impressive, but the Forza (gameplay) demo (to me at least) is also quite a sight to behold and ran iirc on a devkit (yeah it's hard to compare those two). So I try to sum it up: I won't give too much to spec comparisons until I have solid evidence what the machines are capable (or not capable) of - we had so many letdowns / positive surprises in the past generations that I'm willing to wait a few months before passing final judgement on the power of the systems.
I prefer less detail if it means locking in 60fps and 1080p.
Now that PS4 has 8GB of RAM (which devs found out only after Feb 21, for the most part), I expect it to be even easier for devs on that platform to target 1080p@60fps, just as the devs of Forza did with their 8GB of slower RAM/32MB of eSRam.
That post is really helpful, thanks for taking the time to bring my point into a well written and concise statement (sometimes a thing I'm not very good at, plus english not being my first language doesn't really help..).
Indeed this (i.e. the results we can experience) is the metric I almost exclusively rely on - even though I put a lot of my work time into getting the best out of a given hardware / system and appreciate technical advancements, at the end of the day all that (imho) matters is what the consumer has on his screen. And ofc this makes comparisons way harder (for exactly the points you made, plus there are also things like quality of developer tools / documentation, and the respective consumers' personal tastes regarding art style, novelty, effects like bloom / lensflares etc.), and that's why I personally agree (up to a certain point) with the statement that pure hardware analysis is meaningless. Yes you can (and most probably will) get better results with stronger hardware, but I firmly believe there are tons of other important factors that we do not know of (or perhaps are not assessing properly), that simply stating "machine x is much more powerful than machine y because it has more FLOPS, GBITS & whatnot" just doesn't do it for me. When a machine consistently shows better results, then I am willing to agree to that statement.
And yes, PS4 undisputably has clear advantages in the core specs, and yes the Dark Sorcerer demo is really impressive, but the Forza (gameplay) demo (to me at least) is also quite a sight to behold and ran iirc on a devkit (yeah it's hard to compare those two). So I try to sum it up: I won't give too much to spec comparisons until I have solid evidence what the machines are capable (or not capable) of - we had so many letdowns / positive surprises in the past generations that I'm willing to wait a few months before passing final judgement on the power of the systems.
I hope this is a standard most devs can aspire to... I prefer less detail if it means locking in 60fps and 1080p.
Whether MS fu**ed up elsewhere is irrelevant: the guy is largely correct imo. The difference on paper between these two machines will not be directly proportional to the difference visually in the vast majority of games.
The difference in price, however, is key. It's hugely disproportionate when looked at in conjunction with the consoles respective hardware specs. PS4 looks to much better "bang for buck" wise.
Amir0x brought that ETHER on this page. Good shit.
Sorry, I don't think more RAM would really have any affect on that.
Type of RAM may, but as far as I know, doubling the RAM amount would not make it easier to reach a certain resolution and/or framerate.
That's not happening, Amirox. Console developers will continue to prefer more graphical power over higher framerate. It's simply easier to sell consumer on while 60 fps requires numerous venues to do the game justice by displaying it at 60 fps (and many won't).
Still, I share your enthusiasm about next gen. When launch titles look as good as Forza 5 and Infamous, we've got fun time ahead. This is much preferred to Wall Guy crap we started off Gen 7 with.
But just because you don't believe in all the paper specs doesn't mean that others can't, and you keep asking for proof that will satisfy your needs (not paper specs) when there is none available and you know it...
Haha, and seriously for real with that Wall Guy/Box Guy shit at the start of last-gen. This is a much more satisfying start to be sure lol
Edit:
Holy shit, remember the PS3 BoxGuy Photoshop Topic? So many memories haha
Edit 2: Holy shit, I'm the one who made that topic to troll the PS3 for how shitty that game looked didn't even remember that lol
That's a red herring to hide what is obviously teh bias on the NeoGAFs... You only made that thread seven years ago so you could have an excuse to unfairly persecute the XBox One now. While I admire your long-term planning, I'm on to your scheme...
Unless I am greatly misunderstanding the importance of RAM, it should certainly allow developers greater flexibility in how they handle their engines, thus facilitating better framerates and the like if they were heading in that direction.
I could be completely wrong, it's not like flipping a switch obviously, but I don't see why it wouldn't help. Maybe someone could better inform me, as I said I'm not an engineer.
Let's finish this section up by once more looking at a couple of use cases and how they impact memory:
Increasing the framerate. Going e.g. from 30 to 60 FPS will not require any additional memory capacity, but significantly higher bandwidth for the GPU and potentially also lower latency.
Increasing level size. This will mostly impact capacity, since you need to keep a larger set of assets in memory. However, since the set of assets used in each individual frame is not likely to increase much in size, bandwidth requirements are mostly unaffected (and so is latency).