iJudged
Banned
Fixed.How can all your buddies play sports games on it if it's not even out yet? If you're just going to play third party sports games wouldn't it be better to all get the better (and cheaper) system? :/
Fixed.How can all your buddies play sports games on it if it's not even out yet? If you're just going to play third party sports games wouldn't it be better to all get the better (and cheaper) system? :/
So, Leadbetter is good now? He had all sorts of descriptive terms used against him no more than a day or two ago. I can't keep up with the judgments.
Don't let this go lightly folks, or you will never be able to trust a review again.
Maybe this is a different Leadbetter.So, Leadbetter is good now? He had all sorts of descriptive terms used against him no more than a day or two ago. I can't keep up with the judgments.
So what can we take from this? Arthur Gies is either lying to everybody, lying to himself, or has vision problems. If other than the latter, I'm not sure how anybody can take him seriously.
Because why..?Great article from Richard Leadbetter. Can't wait to read posts from people that egged him this past week.
Then tell them to stop being pathetic fanboys. Their ignorance shouldn't impact your enjoyment of gaming. If they want to pay more for inferior ports, let them.
Arthur Gies was the only person there that claimed that there was little to no difference. Everyone else said that there was a big difference between the two versions. Jack Frags in his impressions video noted that multiple journalists agreed with him about the PS4's multiplayer looking better than the Xbox One's single player. And CV&G posted this in their review comments for BF4
http://www.computerandvideogames.co...a-slick-introduction-to-next-gen-multiplayer/
Gonna take more articles than this to undo the damage, but it's a start. I'll take it.
Both points were made on GAF for months just to be "ridiculed" or belittled by Albert et al...We hear different stories about ESRAM from virtually every source we speak to, but two gripes are common. Firstly, the notion of operating between two memory pools for render targets is an additional pain that is not an issue on PlayStation 4's unified 8GB of GDDR5. Secondly - and perhaps most importantly - the most common compliant we hear is that developers really want more than 32MB for their high-bandwidth graphics work.
Speaking of Gies, where are all of those comparison screenshots he said he'd show?
Theory:
He captured the ones Richard showed and punked him with them.
I am getting both, either way I was going to get both. They could care less what's what, they're dad's in their late 30s, family people with jobs who game for fun. Not fanboys.
Speaking of Gies, where are all of those comparison screenshots he said he'd show?
As part of EA's review event for Battlefield 4, reviewers were given the opportunity to spend extensive time with the next-generation console versions of Battlefield 4, in addition to the PC version of the game. Unlike the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of Battlefield 4, the Xbox One and PS4 releases have feature parity with the PC release — they have the same maps, the same player counts and the same framerate.
The most discerning graphics pixel counters will find fodder for pointed fingers and debate on next-gen platforms, as neither console is rendering Battlefield 4 at a native 1080p resolution. The Xbox One version of Battlefield 4 is currently rendering at 1280x720, while the PS4 is natively rendering at 1600x900. As a result, the PS4 version is somewhat sharper than the Xbox One release. Other than that, the two games look very similar over the course of Battlefield 4's single-player campaign, with the same lighting and framerate throughout (see gallery below for unmarked screenshots from both systems — see if you can tell which is which).
eSRAM is expensive.
Someone answer my initial damn question, I forgot what I asked, jeezzz...Buying something because of the name on the box alone is fanboyism regardless of someone's age or marital status.
Of course it will. Even the Wii U sold really well at launch.Being a ticker architecture, the X1 may have more room to grow as its launch titles will use the system less effectively. BF4 has more pixels, better effects and higher framerate on the PS4, but perhaps BF5 will "only" have a framerate and resolution advantage.
My current prediction is that the X1 will sell well to start with but have a sharp drop off next year. But if MS can get the price down enough it might become competitive.
A kinect-less x1 at $299,95 would be tempting.
1) The. Hardware. Is. Not. Equal. Period. 50% more CUs and over double the RAM bandwidth means that no matter how much the XDK improves, the PS4 will be more powerful.
2) Honestly only sort of true. If (1) is true (it is), and the hardware is similar (it is), then the gulf in performance is a known quantity. So it's not that the gap will widen because developers will get more power from PS4 than they do now, it's that they aren't getting as much from it now as they will eventually be able to. Yes it's a semantic argument, but it is important. We know the difference in hardware. But while the developers are still experiencing learning curves that difference isn't going to be fully realized.
He's put like a whopping 4 XB1/PS4 screens in his BF4 review. With this hilarious comment:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/29/5040656/battlefield-4-review
Speaking of Gies, where are all of those comparison screenshots he said he'd show?
eSRAM is expensive.
Hopefully editors over at Edge read this.
However, in directly addressing the specs differential, whether in the Xbox One architects interview or in online forum posts, it has seemingly set itself up for another own goal. Microsoft itself has made the story about parity with the competition, when highlighting what makes Xbox One unique in terms of exclusive games, services and functionality - along with more effort in returning some of the magic to Kinect - may have served Xbox One more effectively in the run-up to launch.
It's standard American journalism to add the suffix "gate" to any controversy name, but aren't these guys in Europe? They big Watergate history buffs?
At the end of the day, as long as the games are fun to play, right?
So what can we take from this? Arthur Gies is either lying to everybody, lying to himself, or has vision problems. If other than the latter, I'm not sure how anybody can take him seriously.
He just threw Albert Penello under the bus.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87103984&postcount=2839
Was the ESRAM the legendary secret sauce?
I'm convinced their "secret" sauce is the scaler. They thought their scaler would be good enough that people wouldn't be able to tell that the games weren't running native 1080p.
Obviously not the case.
For multi-console owners:
PS4 = 3rd Party Machine + 1st Party exclusives
Xbone = Exclusives machine(Ex: Titanfall/Halo)
Both consoles are worth owning. PS4 is just technically superior. Whether you can see it or not, that is a fact.
the X1 may have more room to grow as its launch titles will use the system less effectively.
Eurogamer bringing in some journalistic integrity. Edge, Polygon, IGN etc, take note.
Don't the PS4 and Xbox One use the same scaler? Via the GPU?
Surprisingly balanced article from Leadbetter.
Some people can't tell the difference or are ignorant to it. How many threads to we get on here where someone will say "I can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames second", or indeed "1080p and 720p". We get game reviews where nobody complains about slow down anymore, remember that in SNES game reviews? Or crashes? It's never mentioned these days as it's acceptable.. Well we tolerate it more
If a writer on CVG is saying there is no difference then they basically lose all credibility. Either no integrity or they have no clue what they're talking about.
Easy. As soon as MS gives devs access to dGPU with better tools + cloud - PS4 is toast. 4k patches WILL happen on Xbox One. Its MS's plan all along. Why else the media NDAs until launch? They are planning a big surprise.There seem to be two mindsets here:
1) That the devkits were given later to Xbox One and that the gap will achieve parity soon enough as developers get used to Xbox One.
2) That the gap will continue to widen given that these launch games aren't exercising the potential of next gen hardware, and that if this is the state it is in now, it will only get worse given that developers will get more out of the PS4's potential.
I don't know which to believe.
Eurogamer bringing in some journalistic integrity. Edge, Polygon, IGN etc, take note.
Don't the PS4 and Xbox One use the same scaler? Via the GPU?