Support NeoGAF

[StrongBlackVine]

Then we would all be ripping the ps4 for its weak assed hardware and ignoring it's incredible exclusives.....GAMING in a nutshell



Ooops double post sorry. Cold hands and on phone

Since when has being the weaker console caused exclusives to be ignored? Certainly didn't happen with the PS2,PS3 or even now with the Wii U. You seem to be trying every way possible to damage control, downplay and mitigate the fact that PS4 runs games better than Xbox One. PC being superior to both doesn't make it any less relevant.

 

[Suikoguy]

And your 2000$ PC is only a stronger PS4 (if you keep it strict to games), so whats the damn point?

I found it very tendious too to mention the PC when comparing specs and performance of two closed systems. PC will always have the edge if it have the stronger components because it's a customizable system, that's the whole point of a PC. And this constant "buy a PC if you want best graphics" is stupid too. No I don't want to buy a PC but I want the best possible performance out of my console which I'll probably stick with the next 5 to 7 years.

Besides that some people just want to put a disc in a console and play.

versus

Start downloading from steam, start the game and wait for any incidentals to install, spend who knows how long tweaking the settings to get a decent framerate, later discover that you overcompensated and need to reduce the settings a bit after an hour or so of play. Plus all the other things that you may run into, such as outdated drivers, or drivers that are too new and have issues. Having to download something like dsfix in order to get an acceptable resolution, etc etc.

 

[Shin-Ra]

So dev's are choosing a lower res but with all the same effects as the ps4.

Or lower res and lower detail/quality settings like Shadow of Mordor.

Speaking of which, aren't you the one that had the option of buying SoM on PC or PS4 but inexplicably bought it for Xbone?

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

Since when has being the weaker console caused exclusives to be ignored?

I'm just trying to stress there will always be a weaker console. Why hate on it for being weaker. If there's good games it's fine. Nintendo cut the hardware to have a second screen And I personally wouldn't have it any other way. Those nintendo games look amazing. Even at 720p. I feel sorry for people that wouldn't play those games due to resolution. Anyway I've made my points.

 

[psn]

Besides that some people just want to put a disc in a console and play.

versus

Start downloading from steam, start the game and wait for any incidentals to install, spend who knows how long tweaking the settings to get a decent framerate, later discover that you overcompensated and need to reduce the settings a bit after an hour or so of play. Plus all the other things that you may run into, such as outdated drivers, or drivers that are too new and have issues. Having to download something like dsfix in order to get an acceptable resolution, etc etc.

I just spent 4 hours to get CS GO running again after the latest update. I even redownloaded the whole game, deleted several folders, used a backup config of steam etc... Had nothing to do with my hardware tho, in most cases it's not even your own fault.

I play 95% of the time on my PC and I still like it, but I understand that not everyone has the time or the nerves for it.

 

[Three]

Or lower res and lower detail/quality settings like Shadow of Mordor.

Speaking of which, aren't you the one that had the option of buying SoM on PC or PS4 but inexplicably bought it for Xbone?

Yep, Same person that wasn't impressed by driveclubs effects and was offended by "the jaggies", where resolution helps.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I'm just trying to stress there will always be a weaker console. Why hate on it for being weaker. If there's good games it's fine. Nintendo cut the hardware to have a second screen And I personally wouldn't have it any other way. Those nintendo games look amazing. Even at 720p. I feel sorry for people that wouldn't play those games due to resolution. Anyway I've made my points.

I won't buy a Wii U because I won't buy a console for one or two games I might want play(Zelda and maybe Metroid). Wii U has a serious lack of games unless you only care about and also like the majority of Nintendo exclusives. I don't and it has nothing to do with the visual quality.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Yep, Same person that wasn't impressed by driveclubs effects but was offended by "the jaggies" where resolution helps.

Why am I not surprised?

 

[Goo]

Reading some of the comments here it sounds like DF or at least this writer might me biased in favor of Microsoft consoles. That advantages the 360 had were emphasized and disadvantages the XBox One has are played down.

Is that a fair assessment of their reviews or are people projecting their own reaction to those reviews?

I think when writing technical comparisons it's important to explain what the measurements mean to the reader but not try to convince them whether it's good enough. An explanation of what scaling is and an example of how it compares to native resolution would be more useful than the author's opinion of how important the difference should be perceived.

I get the feeling that some people get upset if these comparisons don't declare a winner or make some statement about how superior or inferior each platform is. Different software on different platforms can perform better or worse than the specs would indicate. If these articles are fair comparisons let the numbers speak for themselves.

 

[Unknown One]

It's a pretty obvious slant towards one side.

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

JAY was you around on gaf or browsing the web back when the 360 was the more popular console to own between that in the PS3? I wasn't a gaf member at that time but browsed this site along with a few others and the 360 mobb was absolutely ruthless to PS3 owners. They would typically antagonize PS3 gamers for owning the more inferior multiplats and sites like DF added fuel to the fire with there tech analysis mainly pointing out why the higher res multiplat game was better on the 360 vs the PS3 counterpart. I feel like if you witnessed that first hand the tables turning wouldn't bother you so much. I owned both consoles at the time and would look to a few sites for info regarding purchasing multiplat games. I can remember clear as day the PS3 version of games being bashed do to lower resolution discrepancies. Let DF deal with the monster they created and don't let it bother you.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

JAY was you around on gaf or browsing the web back when the 360 was the more popular console to own between that in the PS3? I wasn't a gaf member at that time but browsed this site along with a few others and the 360 mobb was absolutely ruthless to PS3 owners. They would typically antagonize PS3 gamers for owning the more inferior multiplats and sites like DF added fuel to the fire with there tech analysis mainly pointing out why the higher res multiplat game was better on the 360 vs the PS3 counterpart. I feel like if you witnessed that first hand the tables turning wouldn't bother you so much. I owned both consoles at the time and would look to a few sites for info regarding purchasing multiplat games. I can remember clear as day the PS3 version of games being bashed do to lower resolution discrepancies.

Very true. And honestly I don't see many people bashing Xbox One versions of games. Unless the mere idea of admitting that the PS4 version is superior is an insult.

I didn't really follow technical analysis last gen, but I remember the Xbox 360 version of Red Dead Redemption being called the definitive version because of slight resolution difference and some extra patches of grass...

 

[justsomeguy]

Reading some of the comments here it sounds like DF or at least this writer might me biased in favor of Microsoft consoles. That advantages the 360 had were emphasized and disadvantages the XBox One has are played down.

Is that a fair assessment of their reviews or are people projecting their own reaction to those reviews?

I think when writing technical comparisons it's important to explain what the measurements mean to the reader but not try to convince them whether it's good enough. An explanation of what scaling is and an example of how it compares to native resolution would be more useful than the author's opinion of how important the difference should be perceived.

I get the feeling that some people get upset if these comparisons don't declare a winner or make some statement about how superior or inferior each platform is. Different software on different platforms can perform better or worse than the specs would indicate. If these articles are fair comparisons let the numbers speak for themselves.

I don't know mate. Some of the posts here make me wonder.

Article says something on the lines of "1080p 60fps is godlike and when ps4 does this it's obviously the winner, but given a choice between 1080 variable and 900 stable (or variable but better), isn't a better frame rate more important than the extra pixels given the impact on user experience".

Seems a reasonable question, the frame rate vs res thread on gaf was huge.

yet apparently that means it's an article all about downplaying xb1 power gap, usual DF bias, etc. Honestly not sure I understand it, I think some people bring as many prejudices to DF threads as they accuse DF of having.

 

[Dictator93]

And your 2000$ PC is only a stronger PS4 (if you keep it strict to games), so whats the damn point?

I found it very tendious too to mention the PC when comparing specs and performance of two closed systems. PC will always have the edge if it have the stronger components because it's a customizable system, that's the whole point of a PC. And this constant "buy a PC if you want best graphics" is stupid too. No I don't want to buy a PC but I want the best possible performance out of my console which I'll probably stick with the next 5 to 7 years.

Excluding its limitless BC, modding, and infitiely larger amount of new releases and niche genres. But whatever... it is just a stronger PS4 except for excel spread sheets.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

If you want 1080p but want the pc settings of medium and then low I guess Yeh. Look at evolve and dying light. Terrible draw distance and not even hitting 30fps at all times. But yup. Resolution is all that matters to an image for these consoles. No difference with af. Aa. Textures. Draw distance. They don't affect the image quality at all. Arguing over consoles that can't even hit 30fps on low pc settings....What am I doing? Lol

I can't tell - are you deliberately being obtuse because you are trolling or are you just so thick you can't understand that lots of people just don't want a PC for gaming?

No amount of your 'Master Race' bullshit is going to change my mind or the mind of anyone else who doesn't want a PC.

If anything, reading your drivel makes me glad you game on the PC with other 'like-minded' people.

 

[Three]

Article says something on the lines of "1080p 60fps is godlike and when ps4 does this it's obviously the winner, but given a choice between 1080 variable and 900 stable (or variable but better), isn't a better frame rate more important than the extra pixels given the impact on user experience".

Seems a reasonable question, the frame rate vs res thread on gaf was huge.

yet apparently that means it's an article all about downplaying xb1 power gap, usual DF bias, etc. Honestly not sure I understand it, I think some people bring as many prejudices to DF threads as they accuse DF of having.

Where exactly are you getting that impression from when the game Leadbetter is using as an example of why resolution doesn't matter is Ryse. Ryse! A game that couldn't even maintain 30fps and dropped as low as 15fps. No, you are just reading what you want to read and drawing a false conclusion. It's called rationalization. Ad hoc hypothesizing mixed with things you think are admirable usually through a false dilemma fallacy.

From the article:

Crytek's approach to filmic, more realistic rendering produces the most compelling evidence yet that it's not the amount of pixels you're rendering that matters

 

[Cyrano]

I think we know now who it matters to. It would be interesting to add PC gamers to the comparison though. Easy to match the author's affiliations too.

I am not sure if I should be happy or sad that these are the primary reasons people are buying game consoles.

 

[justsomeguy]

Where exactly are you getting that impression from when the game Leadbetter is using as an example of why resolution doesn't matter is Ryse. Ryse! A game that couldn't even maintain 30fps and dropped as low as 15fps. No, you are just reading what you want to read and drawing a false conclusion. It's called rationalization. Ad hoc hypothesizing mixed with things you think are admirable usually through a false dilemma fallacy.

From the article:

Your post would have read a lot better without the ad hominems.

anyhow, I interpreted that bit as: It shows 900p can still give a gorgeous result showing the 1080p isn't the be all and end all.

Could have put "the frame rate is still unacceptably low in places" and it wouldn't have changed the point that 900p can look good.

Overriding point being "you CAN drop from 1080p without graphic quality being terrible", not that Ryse has a good frame rate.

 

[tattooed_dwarf]

Very true. And honestly I don't see many people bashing Xbox One versions of games. Unless the mere idea of admitting that the PS4 version is superior is an insult.
.

Lot of people bashing Xbone and it's games, just like there were people bashing PS3 versions back in a day, there hasn't been some magical "growing up" happening. I wouldn't be surprised if these bashings come from same people as last gen, they just moved to Sony's board from 360 camp. But it's vocal minority, there are lot quality conversation on this subject from both "sides", admitting superiority of PS4 version is part of that.

 

[justsomeguy]

I am not sure if I should be happy or sad that these are the primary reasons people are buying game consoles.

Of the whole DF article, it's the opening paras where Richard L says he finds the results "almost unbelievable" that I take issue with.

Why WOULDN'T people go for the more powerful (=higer res) console? I think that's a totally reasonable decision (alongside others such as exclusives, etc.).

 

[Ysiadmihi]

Excluding its limitless BC, modding, and infitiely larger amount of new releases and niche genres. But whatever... it is just a stronger PS4 except for excel spread sheets.

It's like an argument from last gen, except it's missing the "and a slightly higher resolution" part.

Spoiler

don't tell them you can go above 1920x1080

 

[Head.spawn]

Very true. And honestly I don't see many people bashing Xbox One versions of games. Unless the mere idea of admitting that the PS4 version is superior is an insult.

I didn't really follow technical analysis last gen, but I remember the Xbox 360 version of Red Dead Redemption being called the definitive version because of slight resolution difference and some extra patches of grass...

That's some weird selective memory you have there.

"slight resolution difference and extra patches of grass"

The actuality of it was that it was 720p w/ 2xMSAA vs 640p w/an AA that blurs the entire screen. There was a difference in foliage, but there was also a performance difference as well in favor of 360. PS3 version was missing some shadows, lower quality water effects, more aggressive LOD culling, shorter LOD distance, lower quality shadows and self-shadows, etc etc

But, nah, screw all that, just push the narrative that it was only resolution that mattered. Resolution has always mattered to a degree, but that doesn't mean all of those other aspects are not of equal note (I'd say a consistant framerate would be a more important metric to raise hell about).

Quote from the end of said article, "Play on PS3 without having seen the 360 version and it's difficult to imagine that the fun factor of the game has been massively impacted."

..I'm sure if you switched XBO with PS3 and 360 with PS4 and you saw that in a current article you'd have people losing their damned minds, claiming that they're downplaying the differences.

 

[SparkTR]

Native resolution or bust, I use a 1440p monitor and connecting even 1080p content to that looks messy as hell.

 

[FeiRR]

I am not sure if I should be happy or sad that these are the primary reasons people are buying game consoles.

Depends if you care and have similar reasons. If not, it'd probably be smart to stay away as that particular company will surely listen to their customers, more or less. The only thing I can't figure is "brand". What does it even mean, that you buy something because of its name, regardless of features, price, etc? If so, that's terrible.

It's like an argument from last gen, except it's missing the "and a slightly higher resolution" part.

Spoiler

don't tell them you can go above 1920x1080

Such a secret too, only for the chosen ones who then go into the depths of the Internet to spread the holy word.

 

[GhostTrick]

Native resolution or bust, I use a 1440p monitor and connecting even 1080p content to that looks messy as hell.

This. People dont understand that better res is asked to match your native res.
900p on a 900p screen will look a lot better than 900p on 1080p screen.

And that's also what people get wrong when claiming that to see the difference between 720p and 1080p for exemple... you need to be this close to your screen.
It may be true for 720p content on a 720p screen compared to 1080p content on a 1080p screen.

But as for 720p content on a 1080p screen and 1080p content on a 1080p screen... its not true. Because there's still artefacts because of upscaling.

 

[Three]

Your post would have read a lot better without the ad hominems.

anyhow, I interpreted that bit as: It shows 900p can still give a gorgeous result showing the 1080p isn't the be all and end all.

Could have put "the frame rate is still unacceptably low in places" and it wouldn't have changed the point that 900p can look good.

Overriding point being "you CAN drop from 1080p without graphic quality being terrible", not that Ryse has a good frame rate.

I'm sorry if it was harsh but that is frankly what you are doing, rationalizing. You came to the conclusion that the article is about framerate vs resolution because you think that is an easier thing to justify to yourself (ignoring the fact that more often than not you get games with higher framerate and resolution at the expense of IQ, this is the false dilemma). The majority of the article is discussing image quality by sacrificing both resolution and framerate. The example being used is Ryse throughout the article, even the banner. You've drawn a false conclusion from it, the article made no case for 60fps or even higher framerates in general outside of that one line trying to downplay hardware differences.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

That's some weird selective memory you have there.

"slight resolution difference and extra patches of grass"

The actuality of it was that it was 720p w/ 2xMSAA vs 640p w/an AA that blurs the entire screen. There was a difference in foliage, but there was also a performance difference as well in favor of 360. PS3 version was missing some shadows, lower quality water effects, more aggressive LOD culling, shorter LOD distance, lower quality shadows and self-shadows, etc etc

But, nah, screw all that, just push the narrative that it was only resolution that mattered. Resolution has always mattered to a degree, but that doesn't mean all of those other aspects are not of equal note (I'd say a consistant framerate would be a more important metric to raise hell about).

Quote from the end of said article, "Play on PS3 without having seen the 360 version and it's difficult to imagine that the fun factor of the game has been massively impacted."

..I'm sure if you switched XBO with PS3 and 360 with PS4 and you saw that in a current article you'd have people losing their damned minds, claiming that they're downplaying the differences.

OK that is a much bigger difference than I remember reading about, but I did say I didn't follow much last gen.

 

[LowEndTorque]

This article right on the heels of "XBOX ONE TRUMPS PS4 IN RESIDENT EVIL REVELATIONS" is just transparent and embarrassing.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Depends if you care and have similar reasons. If not, it'd probably be smart to stay away as that particular company will surely listen to their customers, more or less. The only thing I can't figure is "brand". What does it even mean, that you buy something because of its name, regardless of features, price, etc? If so, that's terrible.

Brand i think is more than just the name of the unit, but the experience that you feel the company in question gives you. If your comfortable with Live and its given you good experiences, you'd obviously go for it again right? If you were happy with 360 and never ventured outside the territory, it would seem pretty much obvious to go with the next version. The brand is something you trust.

It doesn't necessarily have to be blind consumerism..athough i have no doubt there are more than a few that subscribe to that...

 

[EGM1966]

Depends if you care and have similar reasons. If not, it'd probably be smart to stay away as that particular company will surely listen to their customers, more or less. The only thing I can't figure is "brand". What does it even mean, that you buy something because of its name, regardless of features, price, etc? If so, that's terrible.



Such a secret too, only for the chosen ones who then go into the depths of the Internet to spread the holy word.

Not saying if it's good or band but brand is a key reason for a lot of purchases and in particular never considering other options.

It's why brands are ranked and tracked and have assigned "value".

The issue is whether your brand name a dominant or niche or somewhere in between.

most people are brand affiliated in some form even if they don't think of it that way. For example I only drink Coke never Pepsi. It's a taste thing but it also means Pepsi brand is weak for me and Coke very strong.

 

[geordiemp]

I am not sure if I should be happy or sad that these are the primary reasons people are buying game consoles.

Well, that is the boxes the agreeing participants ticked when agreeing to fill in the Nielson survey....

.....why they asked those specific question and who they asked is another debate, as the question type and who you ask is highly relevant.

Whether you believe that it is representative of the real world reasons nobody will ever know.

Personally, online surveys for gaming always come out wrong in my opinion as gaming is one of those subjects that does not survey well (like porn lol)

 

[travisbickle]

I am not sure if I should be happy or sad that these are the primary reasons people are buying game consoles.

The primary reason is they want to play games. These are reasons why they are choosing one over another, and why Leadbetter's crying into his milk because resolution is a deciding factor.

 

[Head.spawn]

OK that is a much bigger difference than I remember reading about, but I did say I didn't follow much last gen.

I was just trying to illustrate that it was never just resolution that mattered. Somehow the general consensus is that the industry as a whole and sites like DF pushed the idea that it was the end-all discussions determining factor and I really don't agree that is was ever the case. I'm sure the same applies to many games that people claim that res was the only factor.

Anyways, I think the main point of the article was lost on a lot of people. It's not that 720p is now "Okay" and better resolution doesn't matter. It is displaying the idea that games don't always need to strive for 1080p and can opt for a lower resolution and still have great fidelity, and I think the examples (FC4, Ryse, The Order) display that well. Basically getting the best results within the confines of the consoles power.

Just my opinion, but after seeing the finished product, I'd take 1920x800 The Order w/4XMSAA w/Temporal Aliasing over 1080p w/no AA, 7 days a week. Sometimes it is a better choice.

 

[justsomeguy]

I'm sorry if it was harsh but that is frankly what you are doing, rationalizing. You came to the conclusion that the article is about framerate vs resolution because you think that is an easier thing to justify to yourself (ignoring the fact that more often than not you get games with higher framerate and resolution at the expense of IQ, this is the false dilemma). The majority of the article is discussing image quality by sacrificing both resolution and framerate. The example being used is Ryse throughout the article, even the banner. You've drawn a false conclusion from it, the article made no case for 60fps or even higher framerates in general outside of that one line trying to downplay hardware differences.

Actually you're right it is about IQ in general but it does include the line "we're firmly of the belief that frame-rate difficulties have much more of an impact on the overall experience than resolution" which is where I was coming from.

I'm not fussed about 60fps personally - as an older gamer my reflexes aren't that dependent on 60fps response times and i think I got 6/10 ish on the 30 or 60 test - so I am more interested in IQ.

So I broadly agree with the article: Don't focus on 1080p to the exclusion of image quality.

What I disagree with as above is the "wtf?" reaction to the Nielson survey by DF, and to the way people are reading the whole thing as an xbox bias article. I honestly can't see that. False conclusions, to use your phrase.

anyhow I'm out for now - ski slopes calling...

 

[MilkyJoe]

Well, that is the boxes the agreeing participants ticked when agreeing to fill in the Nielson survey....

.....why they asked those specific question and who they asked is another debate, as the question type and who you ask is highly relevant.

Whether you believe that it is representative of the real world reasons nobody will ever know.

Personally, online surveys for gaming always come out wrong in my opinion as gaming is one of those subjects that does not survey well (like porn lol)

Do we have a copy of the questions? were both Xbox and PS4 owners asked the same questions? Were all aspects of the difference between the two consoles in the questionnaire?

 

[pixelbox]

If I recall, 900p syncs perfectly with the crushed blacks. 1080p looks worse with the crushed blacks.

 

[HTupolev]

The actuality of it was that it was 720p w/ 2xMSAA vs 640p w/an AA that blurs the entire screen.

Quincunx in this instance is still sort of 2xMSAA, albeit MSAA that uses a 5-point rather than 2-point resolve pattern. In that sense it's actually a more expensive technique, although hardware design may have made the cost equivalent for RSX. At any rate, it's extremely likely that they could have switched it to "normal" 2xMSAA at no performance cost.

I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in cases where developers chose Quincunx. There is a certain logic to it; although in some cases it does no better than a standard 2x resolve, it does give surprisingly decent results for certain alias patterns. I've had an unhealthy amount of fun in Halo Reach using motion to compare noAA with Quincunx resolve.
At any rate, the gist of Quincunx has hardly been dropped. Quincunx resolve probably won't get used often going forward, but that's probably partly because its spirit lives on in the Flipquad pattern.

 

[Souldestroyer Reborn]

So far, dark10 has had to answer for RL's actions. Its been going on for months. I dont blame him for feeling worn down.

Yeah this tbh.

I actually enjoy the DF articles especially Morgan's and Dark10x's.

Imo though RL is totally dragging them down and effectively, on here at least, Dark10x gets the brunt of the crticisim for stupid shit that RL does/says when he himself has openly said a few times on here words to the effect :

"I don't actually agree on what RL is saying."

Cut Dark some slack guys.

Dark, don't take it personally what people on here are saying when it's not directed at you for the most part. What most people want are unbiased techical based reviews on what the games are doing, how there doing it and what the legitimate differences are between multi platformed games, without a biased spin on things.

Yourself and Morgan do that. RL doesn't. And that's where the problem lies.

RL may be a great guy, a valuable experienced member of the team, however when reading his articles it's difficult to say that he doesn't have some sort of agenda.

 

[Marlenus]

I don't know mate. Some of the posts here make me wonder.

Article says something on the lines of "1080p 60fps is godlike and when ps4 does this it's obviously the winner, but given a choice between 1080 variable and 900 stable (or variable but better), isn't a better frame rate more important than the extra pixels given the impact on user experience".

Seems a reasonable question, the frame rate vs res thread on gaf was huge.

yet apparently that means it's an article all about downplaying xb1 power gap, usual DF bias, etc. Honestly not sure I understand it, I think some people bring as many prejudices to DF threads as they accuse DF of having.

Without full Frame rate analysis, which DF do not perform we cannot tell. At the moment they give us a video, which is a single run through so has rather large margins of error but it is still useful, and their opinion on frame rate. They very rarely show hard data which a proper analysis needs.

Lets say you have a PS4 version of a game running at 1080p and it has the odd dip to 24 FPS but the average is 29.5 FPS. That means that aside from those odd dips it is a practically locked 30 FPS experience. Then you have the Xbox One version of the same game running at 900p and it only dips down to 27 FPS but the average is 29 FPS. Now from one metric the Xbox One has a better frame rate because the worst drop is less than on the PS4. However at the same time the average frame rate is higher on PS4 so it maintains its 30 FPS lock more successfully than the Xbox One version. With such small discrepancies though it is possible that would go missing in the subjective opinion of the writer but the large single drop would be highlighted. Especially if said drop was also on the video.

As you can see from that scenario without full analysis of min, max, average and multiple runs the data DF provide for frame rate analysis is woefully inadequate to actually form any sort of opinion in the majority of games. I do not really think DF is trying to be a technical site like Anandtech, HardOCP, Guru 3d etc, they are trying to be something a bit simpler and I think there is a large market for this sort of analysis but done the same way Anand or HardOCP to GPU reviews, with thorough testing methods, mostly objective analysis and hard data.

 

[FeiRR]

Brand i think is more than just the name of the unit, but the experience that you feel the company in question gives you. If your comfortable with Live and its given you good experiences, you'd obviously go for it again right? If you were happy with 360 and never ventured outside the territory, it would seem pretty much obvious to go with the next version. The brand is something you trust.

That's more like "Where my friends are" than "Brand". I agree it's one of main selling points. Why would I buy an Xbox if I don't know a single person who has it and plays online? (I like online gaming very much). Brand is probably what EGM1966 wrote below and, I'm sorry, but I don't consider it a wise choice. If Coke and Pepsi tasted the same, I wouldn't care at all. The idea that you identify yourself with a brand it totally alien to me.

 

[MilkyJoe]

I think we know now who it matters to. It would be interesting to add PC gamers to the comparison though. Easy to match the author's affiliations too.

PS4's second biggest reason makes you wonder if the 2000 odd PS4 owners questioned thought the survey was about the PS3. If you bought a PS4 for a Blu-ray player you might want to update your 2006 electronics catalogue...

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

Or lower res and lower detail/quality settings like Shadow of Mordor.

Speaking of which, aren't you the one that had the option of buying SoM on PC or PS4 but inexplicably bought it for Xbone?

Not that I need to explain myself but yes. I got mordor on one. I knew I was going to trade it in after I'd finished and a console experience is what it is. I also got it for 10 pounds cheaper than the ps4 version thanks to amazon. So for me not being as bothered about resolutions as others I knew I experienced the same game. Also if you hadn't noticed. My perspective and entire point is I am not controlled by a resolution. There's a handful of games I want to have the most incredible experience with. One of them is gta v. So I went with the ps4 version as I heard that was the best. Little did I know the performance would be that terrible in cities. The constant stuttering while driving down the roads kills me. I should have just wanted fid the pc version that will hopefully be a nice smooth experience.

Also thx for remembering me

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

Since when has being the weaker console caused exclusives to be ignored? Certainly didn't happen with the PS2,PS3 or even now with the Wii U. You seem to be trying every way possible to damage control, downplay and mitigate the fact that PS4 runs games better than Xbox One. PC being superior to both doesn't make it any less relevant.

Is this how sensitive some people are. Ive clearly stated multiple times that the ps4 is more powerful. What are you actually talking about. Maybe it's you that has some issues you need to sort with this.

THE PS4 IS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE XBOX ONE. It plays games at a higher resolution. Is that better for you. I'm saying I don't give a shit and if people really do they should have a pc not consoles made from mobile parts and 3 year old mid range gpu tech

Damn double post again lol sorry

 

[justsomeguy]

Without full Frame rate analysis, which DF do not perform we cannot tell. At the moment they give us a video, which is a single run through so has rather large margins of error but it is still useful, and their opinion on frame rate. They very rarely show hard data which a proper analysis needs.

Lets say you have a PS4 version of a game running at 1080p and it has the odd dip to 24 FPS but the average is 29.5 FPS. That means that aside from those odd dips it is a practically locked 30 FPS experience. Then you have the Xbox One version of the same game running at 900p and it only dips down to 27 FPS but the average is 29 FPS. Now from one metric the Xbox One has a better frame rate because the worst drop is less than on the PS4. However at the same time the average frame rate is higher on PS4 so it maintains its 30 FPS lock more successfully than the Xbox One version. With such small discrepancies though it is possible that would go missing in the subjective opinion of the writer but the large single drop would be highlighted. Especially if said drop was also on the video.

As you can see from that scenario without full analysis of min, max, average and multiple runs the data DF provide for frame rate analysis is woefully inadequate to actually form any sort of opinion in the majority of games. I do not really think DF is trying to be a technical site like Anandtech, HardOCP, Guru 3d etc, they are trying to be something a bit simpler and I think there is a large market for this sort of analysis but done the same way Anand or HardOCP to GPU reviews, with thorough testing methods, mostly objective analysis and hard data.

Yes but the article isn't about xbox > ps4 as much as some are trying to read it that way. It's about resolution not being the be all and end all. In your example DF are saying that instead of 1080p dips to 24 why not go for 900p locked 30 with even better lighting and effects, as it'll probably look even better. Nothing to do with console a Or console b

 

[Souldestroyer Reborn]

So they want the best graphics, shit on the Xbox, and don't want to build a PC. My theory was correct. I'm done here.

Or y'know there's games on either console that people want to play, or play online with their friends who don't want/can't afford a PC also?

Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit drive by posts.

 

[Cyrano]

Personally, online surveys for gaming always come out wrong in my opinion as gaming is one of those subjects that does not survey well (like porn lol)

This is a strange, vaguely terrifying statement that I agree with.

Games survey like porn... huh.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Is this how sensitive some people are. Ive clearly stated multiple times that the ps4 is more powerful. What are you actually talking about. Maybe it's you that has some issues you need to sort with this.

THE PS4 IS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE XBOX ONE. It plays games at a higher resolution. Is that better for you. I'm saying I don't give a shit and if people really do they should have a pc not consoles made from mobile parts and 3 year old mid range gpu tech

Damn double post again lol sorry

You really need to learn how to have a discussion without using words like sensitive or upset for people that disagree with you. Really makes any thing you say after that not worth reading. I'm not emotional about the subject, but you sure seem awfully passionate about it.

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

Well I apologise for those words. It was you that said " your walking on a thin line" and
Made out that I had some anterior motive when I'm clearly stating what I believe. Facts of ps4 being more powerful. You weren't discussing and went with a personal point that I was trying to cover the fact that the ps4 is more powerful. I clearly have never done that. Anyone can see it

 

[Three]

Well I apologise for those words. It was you that said " your walking on a thin line" and
Made out that I had some anterior motive when I'm clearly stating what I believe Facts of ps4 being more powerful. You weren't discussing and went with a personal point that I was trying to cover the fact that the ps4 is more powerful. I clearly have never done that. Anyone can see it

Is 'no maam' your alt account or what?

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Well I apologise for those words. It was you that said " your walking on a thin line" and
Made out that I had some anterior motive when I'm clearly stating what I believe. Facts of ps4 being more powerful. You weren't discussing and went with a personal point that I was trying to cover the fact that the ps4 is more powerful. I clearly have never done that. Anyone can see it

I made that comment to no maam because he/she was basically shit posting. I was not the only person to call them out. Unless you that is your alt I have no problem with anything you've said! I actually agree with some things you've, just not necessarily the way the you've framed it. Any way I've had enough resolution talk for a while.