Glass Shark
Banned
Very astute.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Adam Sessler's: On Xbox One and PS4's Resolutiongate, and Day One Patches
- Thread starter Tripon
- Start date
- Status
Very astute.
ArkkAngel007
Member
Yes, because we should totally be juvenile about it.
I mean, if a few people can respectively state the case, by all means. But we all know how it's going to be.
Bullshit. The PS4 will always have more resources than XBone. The ESRAM isn't magic.
Prepared interviews about video games. Yep, real demanding stuff. It was unusable cos Sessler, whether he is or not, came off like a crazy coke head (it really looked like he was on something)
NoirVisage
Banned
No one in the press had mentioned that, it took Rubens transparency to even force the press to address the why.
lifeexpectancy
Member
Please either a dev or a journalist read this and reply. This is a SERIOUS QUESTION. It got buried in the other thread so I'm asking it again:
There is MORE TO THE RESOLUTION DEBATE than resolution itself. If CoD devs just got their devtools late and couldn't reach 1080p for launch because of that hurdle, then ok fine. If it was just one or two 3rd party games we could possibly waive that off.
However, we have (correct me if I'm wrong) FIRST PARTY titles like Killer Instinct running at 720. This isn't even a large map/campaign level game either. It's a fighter FFS. A fighter with only 2 characters on screen at a time, maybe 4 characters for a split second if they tag out in a 2v2 fight or something. It's NOT a game that should be pushing the graphical limits of the system.
If MS's own internal studios can't get a game like KI up to 1080p, did they get their toolkits late? I mean I (sorta) understand that MS was tweaking graphics drivers or something right up until the last minute, but if you have Forza running at 1080p then surely you should be able to reach that level with a bloody fighter.
And if they couldn't, then the questions are these:
1. Are the Killer Instinct devs just not as good as the Forza 5 devs?
2. If so, why?
3. If not, if they are good devs, why are they not able to reach 1080p with a fighter? Is it a system architecture (aka too small of an eSRAM pool for frame buffers) issue or is it something else since obviously 1080p/60 is at least POSSIBLE as evidenced by Forza 5?
4. If it truly is just inept developers at the helm, why doesn't MS bring in better talent to stay competitive?
And lastly, as it applies to all games not just KI's team:
5. If the XB1 is experiencing these issues now, then what happens at the 4-5 year mark? Presumably by year 2-3 they will better "grasp" memory management with the eSRAM and be pushing out 1080/60 games (we hope), but PS4 developers will become more familiar with THOSE tools over time TOO. It's not like PS4 games have already peaked and XB1 games are going to come up to that level eventually. Neither console has peaked yet, and judging by launch the PS4's peak is just going to be that much higher.
Also, regarding the XB1 development reaching 1080p/60fps, that's assuming game geometry, level size, physics models, AI load, etc all stay stable/flat.
We know these other factors are going to grow over time, putting more load on the system. When that happens, will the system's arguably weaker architecture force whatever workarounds that were discovered to be reduced in order to leave room for these other factors to increase over time? Because if that's the case, then we could see worse than just a lower resolution, we could see games that have portions of the game itself reduced or even eliminated to make up the disparity.
Why isn't this an issue???? Why isn't the press covering this potentiality for gamers so that they can make a well-informed decision??? If even the possibility for that to happen exists due to architecture, that is something that needs to be addressed so people can make a decision on how important that is to them when plunking down $400-500.
Graphics are great, but gameplay matters, and with the rise of Indies gameplay SHOULD matter even more while graphics MIGHT take a back seat. In that sense, there's a solid chance for the XB1 to stay competitive no matter what if it fosters good Indy growth. HOWEVER, if the system architecture causes devs to make sacrifices on the AI, physics, etc due to bottlenecks or what have you, then my gameplay is directly impacted by MS's cost-cutting decisions in the console's conception.
The 720p vs 1080p argument carries so much weight and emotion with gamers because it means so much more than just resolution. It's a symptom of what could (potentially) be a much larger, much more serious problem that could ultimately effect gameplay, and in a negative way, come the mid-point of these consoles' life cycle.
So with all that being said, I think most of the readers' frustration is that the press is ONLY looking at this issue from the standpoint of "you can't see too much difference between 720p and 1080" and isn't focusing on what that will probably mean long-term for gamers this gen. Why aren't press members examining it from that angle?
There is MORE TO THE RESOLUTION DEBATE than resolution itself. If CoD devs just got their devtools late and couldn't reach 1080p for launch because of that hurdle, then ok fine. If it was just one or two 3rd party games we could possibly waive that off.
However, we have (correct me if I'm wrong) FIRST PARTY titles like Killer Instinct running at 720. This isn't even a large map/campaign level game either. It's a fighter FFS. A fighter with only 2 characters on screen at a time, maybe 4 characters for a split second if they tag out in a 2v2 fight or something. It's NOT a game that should be pushing the graphical limits of the system.
If MS's own internal studios can't get a game like KI up to 1080p, did they get their toolkits late? I mean I (sorta) understand that MS was tweaking graphics drivers or something right up until the last minute, but if you have Forza running at 1080p then surely you should be able to reach that level with a bloody fighter.
And if they couldn't, then the questions are these:
1. Are the Killer Instinct devs just not as good as the Forza 5 devs?
2. If so, why?
3. If not, if they are good devs, why are they not able to reach 1080p with a fighter? Is it a system architecture (aka too small of an eSRAM pool for frame buffers) issue or is it something else since obviously 1080p/60 is at least POSSIBLE as evidenced by Forza 5?
4. If it truly is just inept developers at the helm, why doesn't MS bring in better talent to stay competitive?
And lastly, as it applies to all games not just KI's team:
5. If the XB1 is experiencing these issues now, then what happens at the 4-5 year mark? Presumably by year 2-3 they will better "grasp" memory management with the eSRAM and be pushing out 1080/60 games (we hope), but PS4 developers will become more familiar with THOSE tools over time TOO. It's not like PS4 games have already peaked and XB1 games are going to come up to that level eventually. Neither console has peaked yet, and judging by launch the PS4's peak is just going to be that much higher.
Also, regarding the XB1 development reaching 1080p/60fps, that's assuming game geometry, level size, physics models, AI load, etc all stay stable/flat.
We know these other factors are going to grow over time, putting more load on the system. When that happens, will the system's arguably weaker architecture force whatever workarounds that were discovered to be reduced in order to leave room for these other factors to increase over time? Because if that's the case, then we could see worse than just a lower resolution, we could see games that have portions of the game itself reduced or even eliminated to make up the disparity.
Why isn't this an issue???? Why isn't the press covering this potentiality for gamers so that they can make a well-informed decision??? If even the possibility for that to happen exists due to architecture, that is something that needs to be addressed so people can make a decision on how important that is to them when plunking down $400-500.
Graphics are great, but gameplay matters, and with the rise of Indies gameplay SHOULD matter even more while graphics MIGHT take a back seat. In that sense, there's a solid chance for the XB1 to stay competitive no matter what if it fosters good Indy growth. HOWEVER, if the system architecture causes devs to make sacrifices on the AI, physics, etc due to bottlenecks or what have you, then my gameplay is directly impacted by MS's cost-cutting decisions in the console's conception.
The 720p vs 1080p argument carries so much weight and emotion with gamers because it means so much more than just resolution. It's a symptom of what could (potentially) be a much larger, much more serious problem that could ultimately effect gameplay, and in a negative way, come the mid-point of these consoles' life cycle.
So with all that being said, I think most of the readers' frustration is that the press is ONLY looking at this issue from the standpoint of "you can't see too much difference between 720p and 1080" and isn't focusing on what that will probably mean long-term for gamers this gen. Why aren't press members examining it from that angle?
Not sure about twitter but it's been quoted on his youtube channel many times now. Remarkably they have also all been flagged as spam.
SlowRevolution
Member
this is the kind of shit that always ends up getting these threads locked. there's room for good discussion here but if it's going to go down the "sessler's on coke" path it's fucked.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
You'd almost think that there's someone/something behind the curtains...
Calm down dude. I never denied that. I stated that the xb1 version of bf4 is objectively handling a lot more demanding tasks than the xb1 version of ghosts. And they are running at the same resolution. I'd put money on the next cod game running in 900p on the xb1 and 1080p on the ps4.
In fact, I didn't mention the PS4 at all in my post.
Steve Youngblood
Member
There's also the possibility that he's just fed up with the conversation (or perhaps more aptly his perception of the conversation) occurring and is responding with devil's advocacy. I honestly think that this is an easy thing to fall into when hype and enthusiasm are at these kinds of levels. Mind you, I think it's misguided, but it's not altogether absurd for me to envision that some people see all the chatter about this kind of stuff and perhaps draw incomplete conclusions based on meta-observations about the "controversy" without bothering to understand the controversy. I.e. I log on to GAF, see a hot topic with thousands of posts in relation to an unconfirmed rumor about Ghosts resolution on next-gen consoles and think "is this really that big of a deal?" without actually bothering to try to understand where all the participants are coming from.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Yes and that the limitations that ESRAM bring to xbox one will never go away. That ESRAM hurts the Xbox one. Cerny mentions having a eDRAM in PS4 would have made it more powerful, but it would have hurt ease of development for it. I don't know the size of eDRAM they had in mind but I'm guessing it was better than 32mb of ESRAM.
Xbox One – ESRAM & 720P – Why It’s Causing A Resolution Bottleneck – Analysis
http://www.redgamingtech.com/xbox-one-esram-720p-why-its-causing-a-resolution-bottleneck-analysis/
I didn't read this yet but I'm hoping it explain the whole ESRAM situation to you. Looks like a juicy article on the ESRAM and was made recently (yesterday). Take a scan.
snips
mr teaspoon
Member
Respectfully, that's total BS. Nobody who made it to high school has a 'company bias'. You like what you like. If, just for example, I preferred and naturally gravitated to the Sega Genesis versus the SNES, it wouldn't somehow make me an ape incapable of differentiating my preferences versus objective facts. The idea that Sessler is somehow subliminally performing damage control for Microsoft out of some affection to the Xbox brand is just dumb.
No one in the press has ever acknowledged CBOAT. But that doesn't stop 99% of what he says from coming true.
PsychoSoldier
Banned
I don't think anyone has said that "the entire press" is of one mind on this, but that there have been many pieces produced by many different outlets over the past few days echoing this sentiment of "it doesn't matter" has been quite puzzling to a lot of people when it seemed that this sentiment wasn't nearly as present or as prominent last generation.
So in order to support that fact, people produce articles noting that in fact there were some people who did care a whole lot about smaller differences than we are now seeing.
What else are people supposed to do? Do a comprehensive study of every word uttered by every prominent games writer last generation and compare to them to every word uttered this generation? Obviously not.
All we can ultimately do is attempt to recollect what the general sentiment was last generation and compare it to this generation, and noting specific articles is part of the way to show that.
Painting people who feel like it is different as trying to tar every games writers together is being disingenuous or just outright false.
So in order to support that fact, people produce articles noting that in fact there were some people who did care a whole lot about smaller differences than we are now seeing.
What else are people supposed to do? Do a comprehensive study of every word uttered by every prominent games writer last generation and compare to them to every word uttered this generation? Obviously not.
All we can ultimately do is attempt to recollect what the general sentiment was last generation and compare it to this generation, and noting specific articles is part of the way to show that.
Painting people who feel like it is different as trying to tar every games writers together is being disingenuous or just outright false.
well i dont know about everything here but ruben did say that cod didn't reach 1080p because they didn't have time. from kotaku: http://kotaku.com/call-of-duty-makers-explain-why-resolution-is-lower-on-1458105478
NoirVisage
Banned
DRM and E3, the way he fumbled a defense for MS had me in tears, like seeing Mr. Rogers in german dungeoun porn.
NoirVisage
Banned
Sorry, by that, i meant esram.
Man-is-Obsolete
Member
Lol. Too funny.
This really cuts right to the heart of it. People are taking issue with the downplaying because for the last 7 years there was next to no downplaying of the differences. Great job digging up some actual examples. And look at him counting freaking pixels to make a point. I guess having 200k pixels more is better than having a million pixels more. Freaking ridiculous.
Output being gimped because of weak hardware matters to me a lot. A better experience could be had. See Wii vs Dolphin.
With platform exclusives on underpowered hardware that is set in stone, you are forced to take it or leave it tho. It's just unfortunate.
Don't compare outlets in the past to different outlets in the future. Don't compare reviews to pre release pieces. Don't extrapolate a small sample to the whole of games journalism.
For example, CVG is one of the cited websites and they just ran an article about the resolution differences in COD.
Soooooo
Quadraphonic
Member
Yes, and the PS4 SDK will never improve, either.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, without desiring to assert that Sessler specifically is biased, I think you are sort of oversimplifying things here. You're right. Having affinities for certain products doesn't automatically make one unqualified to make observations -- particularly quantifiable observations. However, there are times when our predilections for things influence us in ways we don't necessarily care to admit. It happens all the time wherein people strive valiantly to make objective claims when it's clear that they are not in a position to do so.
So, maybe it's fair to say that the charge is total BS in relation to Sessler specifically. I don't know. However, it's certainly not BS to say that it's valid for many people that "made it to high school."
To be fair, related to the 200k pixels comment, this was in the same article:
"We'll discuss whether lower than HD resolutions actually matter in another story, but for now it's time to look a little bit closer at the differences between the two platforms."
I'm not arguing that the xb1 will ever catch up to the ps4 graphically (it wont). I just find it odd that a significantly less graphically demanding game is running at roughly 100% more pixels on the ps4 while a significantly more graphically demanding game is running at roughly 50% more pixels on the ps4. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
Based on what CBOAT said, I think that the initial resolution problems will be fixed. And by fixed, I expect games to run at 900p/720p on the xb1, and 1080p/900p on the ps4. There is still a large spec gulf. But I doubt IW is doing anything incredibly demanding that's pushing the resolution down. And yes, will the ESRAM issues ever go away? No. But they will get better. (Again this doesn't mean I think that the graphical gap will close).
Sesslers questionable drug use aside, my point was its just one man's opinion, and therefore why do we need pages and pages of discussion on this one mans opinion. He works in the industry, he gets free consoles, he defends minor, ultimately not so important issues of said consoles. Its pretty open and shut
lifeexpectancy
Member
Ok yeah but I'm trying to move past the CoD thing to the bigger issue at hand. If there are bottle necks in the XB1, it could have an effect on something much more important than resolution. I'm talking game geometry, AI, level design, physics, etc. These are things that matter a whole lot more than resolution in the context of playing the game. Resolution matters too, but it's a symptom of a bigger problem, and the CoD devs aren't the only ones hitting sub 1080 on XB1. There are bigger issues at stake though than just resolution, and I think it's a topic that needs to be addressed.
Unfortunately I don't have thread making privileges. And since I'm not a programmer or dev, I can't tell from looking at specs whether the important pieces of the XB1 are strong enough to ensure that resolution will be the ONLY difference because of the memory management issue.
EmptySpace
Banned
oh please. the mainstream gaming press is saying "resolutions aren't that big a deal. calm down". no one is saying, "oh every gaming press person is saying this and that." but the majority of the press that people read and watch videos from are doing the opposite approach this gen vs. last-gen. how much of the mainstream press are there saying, "it doesn't matter"? a lot.
"but you're categorizing them as one big entity." no, and that is why multiple examples from multiple sites were presented, to show how much they agreed on their stances and to compare how much they agree on the issues now. no one is generalizing, but you' have to lack some awareness if you think the articles and videos from the past week are from the minority or those who can't affect any purchasing decisions. no one is saying, "they're all like that. let's pile them up and count them as one being"
it's "they all did that, and look at what they're doing now."
Is this a real post? Every staunch console warrior who never waivers through bad news is someone who has made it to High School (I think) and has a company bias. They're everything that you just said is impossible qualities to find in a person. Not saying that Sessler is definitely that kind of guy, but they certainly do exist so your entire statement simply is not factual.
Yeah, good way of putting it. The momentum for the ps4 has had sort of a reactance effect on many in the press.
Could it possibly be that the press sort of feel threatened by the message being outside of their control? There was also alot of downplay about the whole #nodrm movement when the expectation was that both companies were going the heavy drm route.
Or D), he prefers the industry over the consumer, and the industry from his perspective is better if MS is seen in a better light.
Part his post has been addressed by Empty Space.
NoirVisage
Banned
I made it well past High school and I have multiple "company biases" (You can eat that ballpark turkey frank if you want to!) Its not beyond anyone.
In 2 seconds I found a CVG article about the resolution differences. Soooooo...
ArkkAngel007
Member
I don't know. Is it actually being downplayed? Again, the context of the panel statement was more towards that the PR of these console companies (was aimed at both Microsoft and Sony) was so disconnected. It
It matters to a lot of us. I expected these systems to at least run at 1080p with solid framerates. 60 is preferable, but a locked frame rate that never slows down at 30 would be fine, even preferable to 60 fps with drops.
But that may not matter so much to a lot of people. Many here don't care so much, and I think we've seen enough of the media the past few years to know that plenty of them don't care necessarily for the technical aspects.
It's possible that Sessler and others believe that games will run on both at 1080p and 60fps eventually. Which I agree that it's likely we will see that. Will they be equal? Unless designed to be by third parties, they will not. We'll be seeing greater strides made in design elements on PS4 exclusives.
Which is why, fine, I'll accept his end of 2014 concession. If that's where he feels that we'll see the true potential on how much developers can and will get out of the system and how games will run between ports, ok. But when that time comes and he's still trying to take a step back, I'll be first in line to call him out on his shit.
What I find a bigger concern is his approach to the day one patches. It seemed to escape him completely on what the issue is with both of them. Btw, if he was going to take some bias points there, he could have spun it to focus on the PS4.
It's a bit tricky because this wasn't an isolated incident. One example is when Sessler told everyone the PS4 costs about the same amount as an XBO because on PS4 you have to pay for PS+ while failing to mention the Gold price in his XBO price comparison.
My bet is they were rushed to get the game out of the gate and as a result, were able to do more on the easier to work with and more powerful ps4 version. It could probably brute force its way through any lack of optimizations. They probably hit quite a few snags on the harder to work with xb1 and as a result, brute forced certain things and dropped the resolution until they hit a steady framerate. But Cod is nothing special. Will the ps4 version always be graphically superior? Yeah by a significant margin. But the margin isn't always going to be 1080p vs 720p.
Pristine_Condition
Member
To borrow a line from Mr. Sessler:
Does DetectiveGAF want a STAR for doing its fucking JOB?
NoirVisage
Banned
Thats worse to me
But they need to be called out as a whole, there is no governing body or accountability structure in gaming journalism so they need to publicly in a painful and embarrassing way call out BS when its perpetrated as well as people who are in fact in bag for Sony,Nintendo,MS or any other outside influence. Because you can't tell me that if major sitesor even journalists inside a site started calling eachothers bullshit that the gaming press culture wouldn't shape up fast.
Well IW had Microsoft Engineers on location through part their development process to assist in getting the game up to where they got it. Not sure if they also had Sony Engineers on hand.
What?
Claude Kenni
Member
I have no idea why so many here are developing a persecution complex in regards to the PS4 and gaming journalism. You're the majority, what reason is there to constantly look for and often imagine ways that you think your stance isn't being expressed enough by people who are free to have their own opinions? It seems every day now that an article or journalist's opinion will be posted here and get mobbed for not praising the PS4 enough. Many times the stance will be wildly misinterpreted and that misinterpretation will be ran with. People are acting like there's a steady stream of journalists saying that the power difference "doesn't matter" when I don't know if I've actually seen that said a single time.
When the power of the consoles is discussed it seems that anything less than unrealistically glowing praise of the PS4 is perceived as "downplaying the power difference". Oftentimes the very reasonable opinion is expressed by a gaming site that the obsession some have with the power difference is a bit overblown in regards to determining how much each console will sell. Yet this stance is never considered and saying anything even close to it is written off as "bias" or apologism. Any attempt to discuss the power difference in a wider context where it's treated as anything less than the most important thing ever is immediately discounted. I'm not sure how anybody could not see how out of control the focus on power on this site is. Sure it's worth discussing and a big issue but it's simply not something worth discussing more than everything else combined.
The accusations of bias are becoming completely out of control. There's simply no reason for such a bias to exist in the vast majority of cases people are claiming there is. It's making discussion of articles very difficult as many members here feel a need for every opinion posted to absolutely line up to their own and any attempt to challenge a narrative that has been established here is shut down immediately. That discourages critical thinking, I'm not sure why so many desire views to be homogenized to align with their own when there are multiple valid ways of thinking in nearly every situation. There is no conspiracy in the media to favor one console-maker and thinking such a thing borders on craziness. I welcome diverse views and it's a real shame that some here don't.
When the power of the consoles is discussed it seems that anything less than unrealistically glowing praise of the PS4 is perceived as "downplaying the power difference". Oftentimes the very reasonable opinion is expressed by a gaming site that the obsession some have with the power difference is a bit overblown in regards to determining how much each console will sell. Yet this stance is never considered and saying anything even close to it is written off as "bias" or apologism. Any attempt to discuss the power difference in a wider context where it's treated as anything less than the most important thing ever is immediately discounted. I'm not sure how anybody could not see how out of control the focus on power on this site is. Sure it's worth discussing and a big issue but it's simply not something worth discussing more than everything else combined.
The accusations of bias are becoming completely out of control. There's simply no reason for such a bias to exist in the vast majority of cases people are claiming there is. It's making discussion of articles very difficult as many members here feel a need for every opinion posted to absolutely line up to their own and any attempt to challenge a narrative that has been established here is shut down immediately. That discourages critical thinking, I'm not sure why so many desire views to be homogenized to align with their own when there are multiple valid ways of thinking in nearly every situation. There is no conspiracy in the media to favor one console-maker and thinking such a thing borders on craziness. I welcome diverse views and it's a real shame that some here don't.
ArkkAngel007
Member
Yes, but he's been also very supportive of the PS4 between these two incidents. Honestly, I'm far more bothered by that previous incident than what we're focusing on right now. Again, I think the day 1 patch issue was a big misstep, though I guess it doesn't matter so much to people here because it can't be used as evidence for bias.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
What I think is wrong with applying this just yet to the current Xbox One and PS4 situation is that 2 of the games used in 3 of those links were outright some of the worst ports of this generation. They weren't just significantly inferior versions. They were terrible performance wise to the point of being unplayable on one system, nevermind looking significantly worse.
I don't know about COD, but so far BF4 is far from being in the same realm as the likes of the Red Dead Redemption or Bayonetta ports on the PS3, so I think looking at what they had to say about those games is not remotely the same thing. Nobody could seriously say that PS3 owners weren't screwed with that Bayonetta port. BF4 is far from unplayable on the Xbox One. It both looks great and seems to perform quite consistently at a solid 60fps throughout a very graphically demanding campaign experience. The DF direct feed for Xbox One released was quite terrible, and I do mean terrible, but the Xbox One version doesn't appear to look that way at all based on a lot of other footage released from other outlets. So you have a case of a game that both looks great and displays strong performance consistently, two things I'm not quite sure can be said about Red Dead Redemption or Bayonetta on the PS3. The PS4 has superior resolution and, from tests performed, stronger framerate, but not one single outlet made that framerate sound like a game changer between the two versions, and the gameplay videos prove the Xbox One version doesn't have bad, or even average, performance. In fact, the footage showcases great performance under very intense looking gameplay scenarios. The most glaring flaw of the Xbox One version is quite obviously the aliasing in the game, which seems to have received plenty of attention. We can probably agree that there were far more serious issues concerning the PS3 version of Beyonetta or Red Dead Redemption than some more aliasing.
And what will no doubt look like a double standard, and unfortunately it is, but not for the reasons people think, is that an inferior port on the Xbox One will likely not look anywhere as terrible as one such game may have looked on the PS3. There's far more graphical muscle being thrown around on these newer systems, which, as much as people may not like to admit it, makes the inferior version this time around look a lot less worse by comparison. There may be some seriously epic port debacles this gen, where a game looks atrocious and plays that way on the Xbox One compared to the PS4 version, but BF4 is not one such case.
I always say it but he's been there for me ever since he compared nomoreheros' emptiness to shadow of the colossus's.
- Status