• 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.

[Eurogamer\DF] Orbis Unmasked: what to expect from the next-gen PlayStation.

Insane Metal

Insane Metal

Gold Member
ghst said:
i've got a new favourite insider rumour for durango:

42533_original.jpg


i hear the die is roughly the size of a surfboard.
Click to expand...

Uhm. What? I don't get that, 16 cores? 256MB eDRAM, 2 8xxx series GPU with 3GB RAM GDDR5? Am I reading correctly? No way if that is it!

Edit: oh, old rumor nm then
 
I

infiniteheteroskdasticity

Member
Long time lurker here - just thought I'd add my two cents. I work in the financial services industry and digital entertainment is my area of coverage. For the past year, that has meant I spend a lot of my time on forums like this trying to get any information I can. Just to make absolutely clear I do not know anything non public about the technology on the next gen consoles. Microsoft and especially Sony have been very good at secrecy this time around so speculation on forums like this is pretty much the only way I can get any sort of handle on the next gen.

What I do know something about are the business strategies behind Microsoft and Sony's next generation push and I think that is very important when trying to talk about the capabilities of the next generation of consoles. The way I look at it Sony is the only one building a next generation console - Microsoft sees the XBox as a lot more than just a gaming platform. The next Playstation will be a gaming console first with the capability to do media center stuff as a lesser priority. The next XBox will be a media center first with the gaming capability a second priority.

Sony's strategy for the next generation has increasingly been focused on what some would call 'core gamers'. They would likely be happy to sell around 75% the number of consoles that Microsoft does because the a bigger proportion of its customers would be 'core'. Historically these sorts of buyers buy 3-5x the number of games as 'casuals' so Sony's profitability would be good (most console profits come from software sales). The objective is to release a very profitable console and this is the way to do it. The hardware decisions appear to be getting as much power as possible at a certain price point. The former is why Sony's preferred solution (post cell) was initially to have Intel provide the hardware but the latter is why they ended up with AMD. The next Playstation will be able to do all the media stuff the PS3 can but things like Move and other 'casual' features would be at an incremental cost to a buyer.

Microsoft wants to sell a box that is at the center of everything in the living room and they eventually want to sell all the services for such a box. Their objective is to provide something that combines the functionality of a Tivo, a Playstation and a Wii. They are in negotiations with providers to provide a more a la catre approach to live TV (we think ATT's Uverse and Verizon's FIOS are the most likely NA partners). They will be competing with Apple and Google for this space but will likely be the first to market. In gaming Microsoft wants to provide a clear edge over Sony for 'casual' gamers so will include Kinect as a standard feature down to OS interaction. They see the profitability of this approach being driven by subscriptions to services and not by sales of AAA games. To do this, not completely lose the support of third parties and to still keep the initial price point within $100 of Sony Microsoft will likely release a box that is slightly less capable at playing AAA games than the next Playstation but provides much more than just the gaming + streaming video services the 360 provides.

Microsoft's strategy is obviously the bigger risk and the hardware choices reflect that. Given how important the third parties have been in designing the gaming parts of these machines, Microsoft has likely been forced to improve the original GPU choice and use a lot of special purpose hardware to stay close enough to the next Playstation. While Sony has made some moves to begin talks with service providers, they are far less advanced and unlike the next XBox, the hardware is not designed with this in mind (always on etc). The way I see it, Sony is a safer bet to make a profit but Microsoft has much higher upside if they are able to get a steady stream of revenues from TV services. Sony can still screw it up by diluting the 'core' focus and including 'casual' features that drive up costs on the console and hit profitability (eg included move, touch screen controller etc). That would lead to bigger losses on sales and a higher breakeven bar on software. A better strategy would be to offer all that at added cost.

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
 
C

Clay Davis

Member
Spongebob said:
Trust me I didn't want things to be like this, but actions speak louder than words and MS are making it very clear that Durango won't be a gaming console, but instead a cable box/tv tuner.
Click to expand...

it's pretty apparent that they aiming for both or maybe more. it's a gaming machine as well as a cable box and possibly something you can do your spreadsheets on.
 
Clockwork

Clockwork

Member
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
<wall of text>

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...

I think this is spot on and agree 100%

It has been known for as long as I recall the the XBOX brand was always intended to be the "Trojan Horse" into the living room.

In some ways even the evolution of the 360 and MS's shift in focus over the years (at least that I have observed) has reflected that.
 
B

Byakuya769

Member
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
Long time lurker here - just thought I'd add my two cents. I work in the financial services industry and digital entertainment is my area of coverage. For the past year, that has meant I spend a lot of my time on forums like this trying to get any information I can. Just to make absolutely clear I do not know anything non public about the technology on the next gen consoles. Microsoft and especially Sony have been very good at secrecy this time around so speculation on forums like this is pretty much the only way I can get any sort of handle on the next gen.

What I do know something about are the business strategies behind Microsoft and Sony's next generation push and I think that is very important when trying to talk about the capabilities of the next generation of consoles. The way I look at it Sony is the only one building a next generation console - Microsoft sees the XBox as a lot more than just a gaming platform. The next Playstation will be a gaming console first with the capability to do media center stuff as a lesser priority. The next XBox will be a media center first with the gaming capability a second priority.

Sony's strategy for the next generation has increasingly been focused on what some would call 'core gamers'. They would likely be happy to sell around 75% the number of consoles that Microsoft does because the a bigger proportion of its customers would be 'core'. Historically these sorts of buyers buy 3-5x the number of games as 'casuals' so Sony's profitability would be good (most console profits come from software sales). The objective is to release a very profitable console and this is the way to do it. The hardware decisions appear to be getting as much power as possible at a certain price point. The former is why Sony's preferred solution (post cell) was initially to have Intel provide the hardware but the latter is why they ended up with AMD. The next Playstation will be able to do all the media stuff the PS3 can but things like Move and other 'casual' features would be at an incremental cost to a buyer.

Microsoft wants to sell a box that is at the center of everything in the living room and they eventually want to sell all the services for such a box. Their objective is to provide something that combines the functionality of a Tivo, a Playstation and a Wii. They are in negotiations with providers to provide a more a la catre approach to live TV (we think ATT's Uverse and Verizon's FIOS are the most likely NA partners). They will be competing with Apple and Google for this space but will likely be the first to market. In gaming Microsoft wants to provide a clear edge over Sony for 'casual' gamers so will include Kinect as a standard feature down to OS interaction. They see the profitability of this approach being driven by subscriptions to services and not by sales of AAA games. To do this, not completely lose the support of third parties and to still keep the initial price point within $100 of Sony Microsoft will likely release a box that is slightly less capable at playing AAA games than the next Playstation but provides much more than just the gaming + streaming video services the 360 provides.

Microsoft's strategy is obviously the bigger risk and the hardware choices reflect that. Given how important the third parties have been in designing the gaming parts of these machines, Microsoft has likely been forced to improve the original GPU choice and use a lot of special purpose hardware to stay close enough to the next Playstation. While Sony has made some moves to begin talks with service providers, they are far less advanced and unlike the next XBox, the hardware is not designed with this in mind (always on etc). The way I see it, Sony is a safer bet to make a profit but Microsoft has much higher upside if they are able to get a steady stream of revenues from TV services. Sony can still screw it up by diluting the 'core' focus and including 'casual' features that drive up costs on the console and hit profitability (eg included move, touch screen controller etc). That would lead to bigger losses on sales and a higher breakeven bar on software. A better strategy would be to offer all that at added cost.

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...
I enjoyed this post, but I'm not helping you do your job without compensation.
 
A

Ashes

Banned
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
.

What I do know something about are the business strategies behind Microsoft and Sony's next generation push and I think that is very important when trying to talk about the capabilities of the next generation of consoles. The way I look at it Sony is the only one building a next generation console - Microsoft sees the XBox as a lot more than just a gaming platform. The next Playstation will be a gaming console first with the capability to do media center stuff as a lesser priority. The next XBox will be a media center first with the gaming capability a second priority.



Microsoft wants to sell a box that is at the center of everything in the living room and they eventually want to sell all the services for such a box. Their objective is to provide something that combines the functionality of a Tivo, a Playstation and a Wii. They are in negotiations with providers to provide a more a la catre approach to live TV (we think ATT's Uverse and Verizon's FIOS are the most likely NA partners). They will be competing with Apple and Google for this space but will likely be the first to market. In gaming Microsoft wants to provide a clear edge over Sony for 'casual' gamers so will include Kinect as a standard feature down to OS interaction. They see the profitability of this approach being driven by subscriptions to services and not by sales of AAA games. To do this, not completely lose the support of third parties and to still keep the initial price point within $100 of Sony Microsoft will likely release a box that is slightly less capable at playing AAA games than the next Playstation but provides much more than just the gaming + streaming video services the 360 provides.

.

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. If Microsoft doesn't have a gpu that is better than what's in the PS4, I'd be very surprised. If Microsoft doesn't sell this console at a loss, I'd be slightly surprised. And if Microsoft doesn't have better development tools than Sony I'd be incredibly surprised. They got this.
 
I

i-Lo

Member
How many of you (like me) believe that we can call it a next gen when open world non linear games have visual fidelity to produce characters like we see in linear games today?
Present open world games' visuals:

the_elder_scrolls_v_sujdbu.jpg

the_elder_scrolls_v_sbceyy.jpg

the_elder_scrolls_v_sr0f20.jpg

0cc6aea585507widl.jpg

fallout-3-20080713054cycj1.jpg


Expected future gfx fidelity from next gen open world games:

uncharted-3-36gdkp.jpg

2enowfc8edkn.jpg

og42czmfte.jpg

xjws85giz5.jpg

u3_chloe_drink9kf9l.jpg

505112-uncharted-2-am9odv2.jpg
Click to expand...
Heck, I'd even take this at 720p30fps.
 
M

Monumental

Banned
upJTboogie said:
No I think it's just his thing to challenge any negative MS posts.
Click to expand...
Yes because mocking someone who has gone out of his way to make multiple posts saying Microsot is only about facebook, twitter, and tv services and no longer cares about games really shows my inability to handle negative MS posts.

Its just my thing to challenge any ridiculously ignorant posts.

How quickly would people be jumping down someone's throat if they said that Sony doesn't care about gaming anymore and all they wanna do is create a media centre? I mean, the PSVita is a total flop and they have historically wanted to position the PS3 as a media center and gaming machine second. Plus more people use Netflix on PS3 than the 360, and the PS3 was also a trojan horse for Blu-Ray and later 3D and Move-Waggle.

But just because I can string together a few idiotic points and give them more weight than they deserve doesn't mean it should be taken seriously.
 
Z

ZaCH3000

Member
i-Lo said:
How many of you (like me) believe that we can call it a next gen when open world non linear games have visual fidelity to produce characters like we see in linear games today?

Heck, I'd even take this at 720p30fps.
Click to expand...

Take a look at Crysis. I think the safest assumption is that each open world game will look at least on par with Crysis on Ultra.
 
J

Jinko

Member
Antiochus said:
So now we know the core GPU of the PS4 doesn't even match a stock clocked GTX 580, a card made more than 2 years ago, and in fact is based on a underclocked laptop model, making it closer to a GTX 570/480 in all likelihood.

We now know one thing for sure. Do not expect the Samaritan demo to run 1080p at 60 or even 30 fps on the PS4, even with antialiasing or tessellation turned down. We will be lucky to have on 720 or 900p in medium settings.

To those hesitating whether or invest in a high end PC compared to buying these consoles: Go for the PC, and do not turn back. Current high end(in fact, medium end) PCs of last year already surpasses both the PS4 and the Xbox 720. The gap will only grow larger every year.
Click to expand...

Goes without saying that if you are a true graphics whore you will always stick with PC, doesn't mean that next gen consoles games are going to look any less awesome :D
 
G

Gemüsepizza

Member
Ashes1396 said:
Don't count your chickens before they hatch. If Microsoft doesn't have a gpu that is better than what's in the PS4, I'd be very surprised. If Microsoft doesn't sell this console at a loss, I'd be slightly surprised. And if Microsoft doesn't have better development tools than Sony I'd be incredibly surprised. They got this.
Click to expand...

The rumors hint on av1.25 TFLOPS GPU for Xbox 3 and a 1.84 TFLOPS GPU for PS4. It is basically the same architecture from the same company, so I guess we can compare those numbers. As far as I know, now dev has yet said those numbers are totally off.
 
S

Spongebob

Banned
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
Long time lurker here - just thought I'd add my two cents. I work in the financial services industry and digital entertainment is my area of coverage. For the past year, that has meant I spend a lot of my time on forums like this trying to get any information I can. Just to make absolutely clear I do not know anything non public about the technology on the next gen consoles. Microsoft and especially Sony have been very good at secrecy this time around so speculation on forums like this is pretty much the only way I can get any sort of handle on the next gen.

What I do know something about are the business strategies behind Microsoft and Sony's next generation push and I think that is very important when trying to talk about the capabilities of the next generation of consoles. The way I look at it Sony is the only one building a next generation console - Microsoft sees the XBox as a lot more than just a gaming platform. The next Playstation will be a gaming console first with the capability to do media center stuff as a lesser priority. The next XBox will be a media center first with the gaming capability a second priority.

Sony's strategy for the next generation has increasingly been focused on what some would call 'core gamers'. They would likely be happy to sell around 75% the number of consoles that Microsoft does because the a bigger proportion of its customers would be 'core'. Historically these sorts of buyers buy 3-5x the number of games as 'casuals' so Sony's profitability would be good (most console profits come from software sales). The objective is to release a very profitable console and this is the way to do it. The hardware decisions appear to be getting as much power as possible at a certain price point. The former is why Sony's preferred solution (post cell) was initially to have Intel provide the hardware but the latter is why they ended up with AMD. The next Playstation will be able to do all the media stuff the PS3 can but things like Move and other 'casual' features would be at an incremental cost to a buyer.

Microsoft wants to sell a box that is at the center of everything in the living room and they eventually want to sell all the services for such a box. Their objective is to provide something that combines the functionality of a Tivo, a Playstation and a Wii. They are in negotiations with providers to provide a more a la catre approach to live TV (we think ATT's Uverse and Verizon's FIOS are the most likely NA partners). They will be competing with Apple and Google for this space but will likely be the first to market. In gaming Microsoft wants to provide a clear edge over Sony for 'casual' gamers so will include Kinect as a standard feature down to OS interaction. They see the profitability of this approach being driven by subscriptions to services and not by sales of AAA games. To do this, not completely lose the support of third parties and to still keep the initial price point within $100 of Sony Microsoft will likely release a box that is slightly less capable at playing AAA games than the next Playstation but provides much more than just the gaming + streaming video services the 360 provides.

Microsoft's strategy is obviously the bigger risk and the hardware choices reflect that. Given how important the third parties have been in designing the gaming parts of these machines, Microsoft has likely been forced to improve the original GPU choice and use a lot of special purpose hardware to stay close enough to the next Playstation. While Sony has made some moves to begin talks with service providers, they are far less advanced and unlike the next XBox, the hardware is not designed with this in mind (always on etc). The way I see it, Sony is a safer bet to make a profit but Microsoft has much higher upside if they are able to get a steady stream of revenues from TV services. Sony can still screw it up by diluting the 'core' focus and including 'casual' features that drive up costs on the console and hit profitability (eg included move, touch screen controller etc). That would lead to bigger losses on sales and a higher breakeven bar on software. A better strategy would be to offer all that at added cost.

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...

Everything your saying here is 100% accurate, only Sony and Nintendo will be releasing game consoles this time around, MS will be releasing a cable box/tv tuner.
 
H

Horse Armour

Member
i-Lo said:
How many of you (like me) believe that we can call it a next gen when open world non linear games have visual fidelity to produce characters like we see in linear games today?

Heck, I'd even take this at 720p30fps.
Click to expand...
Lol, you really think next gen open world games won't have better characters than Uncharted? The characters in Skyrim look better than 99% of characters from the last gen.
 
I

i-Lo

Member
ZaCH3000 said:
Take a look at Crysis. I think the safest assumption is that each open world game will look at least on par with Crysis on Ultra.
Click to expand...

You're in for one bitter disappointment. Perhaps we'll get to crysis 3 on medium settings in open world games by END of the next generation. For linear games, perhaps around mid-high to high from day one.
 
G

grimshawish

Banned
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
Long time lurker here - just thought I'd add my two cents. I work in the financial services industry and digital entertainment is my area of coverage. For the past year, that has meant I spend a lot of my time on forums like this trying to get any information I can. Just to make absolutely clear I do not know anything non public about the technology on the next gen consoles. Microsoft and especially Sony have been very good at secrecy this time around so speculation on forums like this is pretty much the only way I can get any sort of handle on the next gen.

What I do know something about are the business strategies behind Microsoft and Sony's next generation push and I think that is very important when trying to talk about the capabilities of the next generation of consoles. The way I look at it Sony is the only one building a next generation console - Microsoft sees the XBox as a lot more than just a gaming platform. The next Playstation will be a gaming console first with the capability to do media center stuff as a lesser priority. The next XBox will be a media center first with the gaming capability a second priority.

Sony's strategy for the next generation has increasingly been focused on what some would call 'core gamers'. They would likely be happy to sell around 75% the number of consoles that Microsoft does because the a bigger proportion of its customers would be 'core'. Historically these sorts of buyers buy 3-5x the number of games as 'casuals' so Sony's profitability would be good (most console profits come from software sales). The objective is to release a very profitable console and this is the way to do it. The hardware decisions appear to be getting as much power as possible at a certain price point. The former is why Sony's preferred solution (post cell) was initially to have Intel provide the hardware but the latter is why they ended up with AMD. The next Playstation will be able to do all the media stuff the PS3 can but things like Move and other 'casual' features would be at an incremental cost to a buyer.

Microsoft wants to sell a box that is at the center of everything in the living room and they eventually want to sell all the services for such a box. Their objective is to provide something that combines the functionality of a Tivo, a Playstation and a Wii. They are in negotiations with providers to provide a more a la catre approach to live TV (we think ATT's Uverse and Verizon's FIOS are the most likely NA partners). They will be competing with Apple and Google for this space but will likely be the first to market. In gaming Microsoft wants to provide a clear edge over Sony for 'casual' gamers so will include Kinect as a standard feature down to OS interaction. They see the profitability of this approach being driven by subscriptions to services and not by sales of AAA games. To do this, not completely lose the support of third parties and to still keep the initial price point within $100 of Sony Microsoft will likely release a box that is slightly less capable at playing AAA games than the next Playstation but provides much more than just the gaming + streaming video services the 360 provides.

Microsoft's strategy is obviously the bigger risk and the hardware choices reflect that. Given how important the third parties have been in designing the gaming parts of these machines, Microsoft has likely been forced to improve the original GPU choice and use a lot of special purpose hardware to stay close enough to the next Playstation. While Sony has made some moves to begin talks with service providers, they are far less advanced and unlike the next XBox, the hardware is not designed with this in mind (always on etc). The way I see it, Sony is a safer bet to make a profit but Microsoft has much higher upside if they are able to get a steady stream of revenues from TV services. Sony can still screw it up by diluting the 'core' focus and including 'casual' features that drive up costs on the console and hit profitability (eg included move, touch screen controller etc). That would lead to bigger losses on sales and a higher breakeven bar on software. A better strategy would be to offer all that at added cost.

I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...

Well reasoned. And ofc it fits both companies. For MS Xbox is a risky sideline, it needs to prove its worth and also help the rest of the company.

Meanwhile Sony are the more traditional and experienced player.
Also off only one has the big tech to expand beyond games.

However Sony took an interest in the cloud, maybe a lot of that stuff just won't be on spec?
 
U

Uno Venova

Banned
Monumental said:
Yes because mocking someone who has gone out of his way to make multiple posts saying Microsot is only about facebook, twitter, and tv services and no longer cares about games really shows my inability to handle negative MS posts.

Its just my thing to challenge any ridiculously ignorant posts.

How quickly would people be jumping down someone's throat if they said that Sony doesn't care about gaming anymore and all they wanna do is create a media centre? I mean, the PSVita is a total flop and they have historically wanted to position the PS3 as a media center and gaming machine second. Plus more people use Netflix on PS3 than the 360, and the PS3 was also a trojan horse for Blu-Ray and later 3D and Move-Waggle.

But just because I can string together a few idiotic points and give them more weight than they deserve doesn't mean it should be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Try not getting worked up if the posts are so ignorant then.
 
Z

ZaCH3000

Member
i-Lo said:
You're in for one bitter disappointment. Perhaps we'll get to crysis 3 on medium settings in open world games by END of the next generation.
Click to expand...

No, my expectations are in check. Your predicting Armageddon. Your in for a bitter and stressful 3-4 months leading up to E3 if you honestly don't think we will see Crysis 1 Ultra visuals as the norm next-gen for open world games.

ViewtifulJC said:
ibdjSQudf9Lotd.gif
Click to expand...

You use a GIF to explain what you can't. Nice.
 
R

Rösti

Unconfirmed Member
It's most likely nothing (probably just hardware failure), but I can't access http://www.scedev.net/. Same goes for the Secure.

It says that the server isn't responding. Is it only me? For anything, I heard a while ago that the dev site underwent some changes. Don't know what really, but I would assume perhaps better framework and updated Orbis literature. Anyone can confirm this?

devnet02u0r.png
Click to expand...

Archived image from 2009.
 
Boss Man

Boss Man

Member
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...
I think you're right that Sony's best bet is to focus on the core market, but I think it's only the best move for them and not the best move in general. As much as I love Sony as a gamer, I don't have much faith in their ability to bring everything together into that "center of the living room" box that Microsoft is focusing on. I think that ultimately, Microsoft is on a very good track to succeed at what they're trying to do with the traction they've gained this generation in the U.S. and their software capabilities when it comes to crafting a nice OS and gluing all kinds of features to it.

I guess Microsoft is taking a bigger risk? But this is probably the time to do it, and I think that they are in a very good position to pull it off. Plus, if they don't, oh well. This is what they wanted all along, and now is their time to go after it. So it's sort of, "We're more ready now than we ever will be."

I like Sony's approach on a personal level, and I really hope that, at worst, they find the profitable niche that you're talking about. I think Nintendo did a fantastic job with the Wii carving this sort of niche out for themselves, where they are no longer really part of the console competition and even if traditional consoles go away they will still be able to put out unique boxes that play their first party games exclusively and make a profit.

I think if Sony is going to carve its own niche (the console for "core" gamers), the absolutely pivotal moment for them will be in the very initial push. They have to come out immediately with games that are separated from what is on the next Xbox. Otherwise, the PS4 risks being seen by too many as the same thing as an Xbox, but without all of the extra features. It has to be something more than an Xbox, but without all of the extra features- and it has to make that clear very quickly. According to rumors, it looks like the PS4 will be a bit more capable of a gaming machine, but I don't think that is nearly as important as we might assume. All this means is that developers can get more out of it, it doesn't mean that they will end up doing it. Personally, I believe that the success of the PS4 (and maybe of Playstation as a brand going forward) lies totally on the shoulders of the first parties that they have been priming over the past several years. They need these developers to come through strongly, and show everyone that the PS4 is a more capable gaming machine. Even if it wasn't, this would still be the case. Sony's chips are all on their first party developers right now, in my opinion. Which I guess is exactly the way it should be, I really hope that they succeed.
 
S

somuchwater

Member
infiniteheteroskdasticity said:
I'd like to hear thoughts/feedback on this thesis.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree. Nothing that Sony has done seems to suggest they're willing to cede control of the living room to Microsoft, Apple or Google. Quite to the contrary, now that they finally have a media ecosystem in place, it seems like they would push even harder.

That said, I think Microsoft better understand how to succeed in that space, and have a more robust, comprehensive ecosystem behind them.

But I just don't see why or how a difference in the type of RAM provides such a stark difference between how each company is approaching the non-gaming aspect of their boxes. The idea that Microsoft would have worked so hard to become a significant force in core gaming only to abandon it a few years later just doesn't add up to me.

Edit: And similarly, I also think it'd be weird for Sony to have made media features so central to the PS3, and then have them abandon that approach with PS4.

Put another way: there is no sustainable way to produce a home console that only does games. GAF may not like it, but it's true. Only a tiny fragment of consumers would buy a box to put under their TV that didn't also double as a Netflix device etc etc.
 
A

Ashes

Banned
Gemüsepizza;46670647 said:
The rumors hint on av1.25 TFLOPS GPU for Xbox 3 and a 1.84 TFLOPS GPU for PS4. It is basically the same architecture from the same company, so I guess we can compare those numbers. As far as I know, now dev has yet said those numbers are totally off.
Click to expand...

The fact that no dev has complained about a teraflop tops gpu is weird. Except of course those who are showing off next gen games on a gtx 680. They've got ball park target specs. Why would they complain?

Edit: it'll be closer to a ps4 than a gtx 680 mind.
 
S

sense

Member
i don't know if this has been said already but apparently there is a press tour in london tomorrow. yosp just tweeted about landing there and he also tweeted it will be an exciting week! one of the writers from eurogamer tweeted the following

@ManuelStanislao
@stoneman_laura it’s an huge press tour where the major Sony’s developers show their new games to the press for the first time.
 
I

i-Lo

Member
ZaCH3000 said:
No, my expectations are in check. Your predicting Armageddon. Your in for a bitter and stressful 3-4 months leading up to E3 if you honestly don't think we will see Crysis 1 Ultra visuals as the norm next-gen for open world games.
Click to expand...

Shit.... sorry, lol I misread the first one as Crysis 3 (which is why I kept on referring to C3). Yea, that makes sense actually. But, I am still more conservative in my estimation. I'd say around high.
 
N

NBtoaster

Member
i-Lo said:
You're in for one bitter disappointment. Perhaps we'll get to crysis 3 on medium settings in open world games by END of the next generation. For linear games, perhaps around mid-high to high from day one.
Click to expand...

Far Cry 3 doesn't look that much worse than Crysis and is on current gen consoles.

Crysis only has some fancy shaders and pushes a lot of polys, there's nothing that demanding about it these days. The lighting is really outdated.
 
A

Ashes

Banned
sense said:
i don't know if this has been said already but apparently there is a press tour in london tomorrow. yosp just tweeted about landing there and he also tweeted it will be an exciting week! one of the writers from eurogamer tweeted the following

@ManuelStanislao
@stoneman_laura it’s an huge press tour where the major Sony’s developers show their new games to the press for the first time.
Click to expand...

Hmm....
 
I

Iacobellis

Junior Member
sense said:
i don't know if this has been said already but apparently there is a press tour in london tomorrow. yosp just tweeted about landing there and he also tweeted it will be an exciting week! one of the writers from eurogamer tweeted the following

@ManuelStanislao
@stoneman_laura it’s an huge press tour where the major Sony’s developers show their new games to the press for the first time.
Click to expand...

boldstate-hype-train.png


"All aboard!" Choo choo! Chugga-chugga, chugga-chugga! CHOO CHOO!
 
A

Angelus Errare

Banned
Spongebob said:
Hardware phrases of the current gen:

360: None
PS3: "Unlock the potential of the Cell"

Hardware phrases of next gen?:

720: "Wait until devs unlock the potential of the secret sauce"
PS4: None?
Click to expand...

More like

Beginning:

360: None
PS3: Hidden potential

End:

360: Hidden potential, untapped power (just search those two phrases in the Halo 4 threads)
PS3: power of cell
 
M

Marco1

Member
The performance gap between the two will be tiny.
MS know that all they need are decent iterations of COD and FIFA to sell. Yes they will have their own first party titles but they really only need Forza and Halo to compete with Sony as it is not worth it to fund many first party studios to try and sell the console.
Their third party DLC strategy has worked well for them and I can see them continuing with it,
why try and do all the work yourself when all you have to do is throw some extra dollars and free ads at someone else to take all of the risks and do the donkey work. Even if it doesn't work out for MS they have the funds to pick up the pieces and try again.
Sony are in the biggest risk next-gen, if it doesn't work for them then they're screwed. They need a more powerful, core gaming machine and capitalise on that. If your third party game performs better then advertise it looks and plays better. 60fps over 30fps, more graphical effects etc.
It's the only reason I purchased more multi-plats on 360 and I'll do the same next-gen. Sony don't have the money to match MS in DLC exclusivity so they need another approach.
 
G

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
sense said:
i don't know if this has been said already but apparently there is a press tour in london tomorrow. yosp just tweeted about landing there and he also tweeted it will be an exciting week! one of the writers from eurogamer tweeted the following

@ManuelStanislao
@stoneman_laura it’s an huge press tour where the major Sony’s developers show their new games to the press for the first time.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm.

I would be really surprised if they showed and embargoed next-gen software ahead of an initial press conference. Have they ever done that before?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Immortals of Aveum set to receive HDR and FSR 3 console frame generation (High dynamic range imminent, frame-gen "in just a few short weeks")
Game Dev 2 3
101
6K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
DF Direct Special: Next-Gen Xbox/Series X Refresh - Microsoft/FTC Leak Reaction
News 2 3 4
185
15K
Mahavastu replied
Eurogamer: What is the point of Xbox?
2 3 4
159
12K
mckmas8808 replied
Around 50% of PlayStation First-Party Games Are Sold As Physical Copies
Rumor 2
68
3K
Woopah replied
Next-gen Xbox is on track for 2026; features two SKUs including a Switch-like handheld, it's claimed
4 5 6 7 8
393
26K
tusharngf replied
Top Bottom