Support NeoGAF

[Hanmik]

Knack is interesting. It seems like an up resed PS2 game with minimal environmental interaction, runs at 40 FPS and looks like crap. Certainly an awful display of PS4's potential. It should have been a $20 downloadable title

ehh did you read the tread title..? Digital Foundry: the complete Xbox One architects interview

 

[gruenel]

I think the discontentment comes not from the fact that Xbox fans resent criticism of the platform from other posters. Instead, it's the constant barrage of irrational hatre shown towards the games being developed for the X1.

You mean like Knack gets shit on in every other thread (example a few posts above [Edit: and below] yours)?

This crap is not exclusive to one camp.

 

[SniperHunter]

ehh did you read the tread title..? Digital Foundry: the complete Xbox One architects interview

I was responding to DC, he was talking about Kanck on the last page. My apologies

 

[Mokubba]

Knack is interesting. It seems like an up resed PS2 game with minimal environmental interaction, runs at 40 FPS and looks like crap. Certainly an awful display of PS4's potential. It should have been a $20 downloadable title

Can't you describe a game without hyperbole.

 

[Hanmik]

I was responding to DC, he was talking about Kanck on the last page. My apologies

lol ok.. that post just seemed really misplaced.. maybe you should have quoted the post you are responding...

 

[fastford58]

I think the discontentment comes not from the fact that Xbox fans resent criticism of the platform from other posters. Instead, it's the constant barrage of irrational hatre shown towards the games being developed for the X1.

Threads for X1 games will be filled to the brim with ridiculous statements about the development process of the game, many of which are blatantly untrue. These threads also get bombarded with PS4 comparisons, irrelevant policy discussions and general FUD being spouted by those posters who have already made it clear that they have no intention of buying the console or the game.

Yeah, because the PS4 threads haven't been graveyards of ridiculousness from the MS side of things. Corporate shills, private shills, outright child-like behaviour.

It goes both ways, but at least the X1 is deserving of the criticism at this point. The ball is in MS court to really prove themselves and they are doing a terrible job of it so far.

EDIT: haha at the posts on THIS very page proving my point.

 

[FeiRR]

Auditorium? Hell no, more like an Amphitheatre! All those who go against the grain shall have to battle it out amongst the bears, lions and ethiopian gelada baboons!

Sounds like certain areas of Reddit. You shall find many friends there. They all bear the mark of the beast (green X).

 

[DC R1D3R]

Knack is interesting. It seems like an up resed PS2 game with minimal environmental interaction, runs at 40 FPS and looks like crap. Certainly an awful display of PS4's potential. It should have been a $20 downloadable title

Now you see, Snipes over here is a level headed dude. Sony fan. Yes. But apart from that, we're just the same. We both can spot bullshit from a mile away.

If Shigeru Miyamoto stood in front of a packed audience on GAF, spouting out the seven laws of physics and then all of a sudden dropped Knack on us.........well the mind boggles!

 

[SwiftDeath]

Now you see, Snipes over here is a level headed dude. Sony fan. Yes. But apart from that, we're just the same. We both can spot bullshit from a mile away.

If Shigeru Miyamoto stood in front of a packed audience on GAF, spouting out the seven laws of physics and then all of a sudden dropped Knack on us.........well the mind boggles!

So you're trying to say that there must be console parity simply because in one interview/presentation Cerny didn't have a long enough transition period between technical discussion and a video of Knack?

Really?

That is your argument?

 

[DC R1D3R]

So you're trying to say that there must be console parity simply because in one interview/presentation Cerny didn't have a long enough transition period between technical discussion and a video of Knack?

Really?

That is your argument?

I think it's a fair one.

 

[SwiftDeath]

I think it's a fair one.

How does that have anything to do with console parity?

Please enlighten me

 

[Gestault]

[Well-put long format post]

The only issue I have with this overview of the state of affairs is that it effectively justifies even the irrational and overly critical reactions to things. General wariness is smart and justified, but that's different from the ways I see people dismissing useful information because they're predisposed to dislike it by association. And by dismissing, I mean avoiding wholesale, while continuing criticism based on what they assume is taking place. I'm not talking about trolling, since that happens regardless (the volume shifts around, and its annoying, but that's a different dynamic). People who "contribute" by saying things like "Leadbetter? Haha, didn't read" aren't doing anything to help these conversations. Not taking a source at face value is one thing, but if so many people can't be bothered with engaging the claims being made (whether the result is useful information or catching misinformation), the "filter" of discussion isn't taking place.

My concern is that this filter, in terms of the conversations in the lead-up to the Xbox One, isn't working like it should. Legitimately impressive games, ideas and implementations are being dismissed, often with the same contempt as the bad policies, flat tone and misleading marketing communications. If the enthusiast contingent of gaming can't be bothered with sending appropriate signals (in the sense of recognizing and appreciating the things we tend to like in gaming), then it should be no wonder that communication coming from the other side of the fence sounds so tone-deaf; This is exactly how Sony must have felt in 2007, when they were working their asses off to cater content and features on their platform, and gamers were too busy plugging their ears, shouting "LOL CRABS! HEY GUYS, REMEMBER ENEMY CRABS?" I found that period frustrating, because I saw Sony reacting and shifting faster than they ever had, and their audience ignoring it the whole time. Our feedback, good or bad, matters if we want content that fits our desires. I feel like I've seen Microsoft react fast enough that they have my attention again, and I don't need people to agree with that, but I won't defend people burying their heads from new information because they disliked old information when it's been shifted in response to what they supposedly wanted.

You're absolutely right about the once bitten, twice shy element at play here. People dismissing the negativity toward Microsoft would be well served to think of it in those terms. My issue comes from the mixture of crocodile tears and a community accepting petty and lazy reactions to things in the hobby we all like.

More directly on topic: The tech advantages of the PS4 compared to the XB1 shouldn't be downplayed. That sort of gap hasn't harmed content creation in the past, but it's absolutely given a perk to those playing on the more powerful platform. A less expensive and more technically proficient system has an incredible competitive advantage, as far as I'm concerned. Even if that added power were incremental, in the long run.

 

[SwiftDeath]

My concern is that this filter, in terms of the conversations in the lead-up to the Xbox One, isn't working like it should. Legitimately impressive games, ideas and implementations are being dismissed, often with the same contempt as the bad policies, flat tone and misleading marketing communications. If the enthusiast contingent of gaming can't be bothered with sending appropriate signals (in the sense of recognizing and appreciating the things we tend to like in gaming), then it should be no wonder that communication coming from the other side of the fence sounds so tone-deaf; This is exactly how Sony must have felt in 2007, when they were working their asses off to cater content and features on their platform, and gamers were too busy plugging their ears, shouting "LOL CRABS! HEY GUYS, REMEMBER ENEMY CRABS?" I found that period frustrating, because I saw Sony reacting and shifting faster than they ever had, and their audience ignoring it the whole time. Our feedback, good or bad, matters if we want content that fits our desires. I feel like I've seen Microsoft react fast enough that they have my attention again, and I don't need people to agree with that, but I won't defend people burying their heads from new information because they disliked old information when it's been shifted in response to what they supposedly wanted.

How should I as some one who will not buy an XB1 at that price point tell XB1 devs I find their games interesting?

The only thing that springs to mind would be buying the games without the system?

As that's the best way to show your enthusiasm

Honestly I just stay out of XB1 game threads for the most part unless the discussion is of technical nature about the XB1 itself

 

[watership]

Thank you Amir0x for another brilliant post

I'm so glad you brought up the climate change "debate". MS is definitely taking a page from that playbook. There is actually a book called "Merchants of Doubt" by Naomi Oreskes about how corporations spread doubt through misinformation when facing overwhelming evidence against their interests. What they do is find a handful of scientists to publish false findings and since those findings contradict the consensus among legitimate scientists, the consensus is no longer viewed as a certainty. And that is how we are still debating climate change, especially in the US.

Edit: It is also why we are still debating the power gap between the consoles with certain folk

I think the doubt from the small vocal minority is because the devices are not out yet. You have some devs saying one is better than the other, the specs generally supporting that.. and people saying "let's see how the actual games and hardware suss out.". There is also some history of the PS3 being aggressively argued online as more powerful than the 360, even beyond launch. When all is said and done, all we have to argue now, is numbers.

 

[Gestault]

How should I as some one who will not buy an XB1 at that price point tell XB1 devs I find their games interesting?

The only thing that springs to mind would be buying the games without the system?

As that's the best way to show your enthusiasm

Honestly I just stay out of XB1 game threads for the most part unless the discussion is of technical nature about the XB1 itself

Not owning a system doesn't stop someone from discussing what they hear about games being made for it. If someone is *categorically* not interested in games because they don't want the platform they're available for, I may disagree with that outlook, but that's not what I was trying to bring up. I would hope that brand and platform matters less than content, but that's something I don't really have an effect on. It sounds like you're saying that personally, price is the issue. Why the would you not react to games being made available for it over time? Will those games disappear as soon as you have the system? Will the system never drop in price?

Developers, now more than ever, are able to pay attention to how people react to their announcements. If you followed what I said, my issue isn't people who don't comment, it's people who in effect say "I didn't read it," or muck-up the conversation by making noise based on things other than the actual info in front of them. That's not a useful contribution, and (thankfully) it sounds like it doesn't apply to your situation.

 

[rvy]

Amir0x, bless your heart. I'll make sure to punch people who call you a faggot on YT.

 

[2dshmuplover]

Leadbetter continues to verbatim repeat Microsoft nonsense about XB1 'balance', consistently couches the articles in language that attempts to diminish PS4's massive advantage, has had several articles with misinformation within them, has given a hilariously disproportionate amount of attention to the demonstrably inferior system tech wise - which is silly considering the point of Digital Foundry - and each time he uses the time to run defense on Microsoft's comically underwhelming hardware decisions.

That is simply your interpretation. All of the published Digital Foundry Xbox One articles so far I've see as informative, you obviously view them as damage control. Take the Ryse 900p article for instance, many people claimed Leadbeter was thoroughly biased posting that but all he done was shed some light on the true implications of 900p. As far as I'm concerned that is what they should be doing. He has stated multiple times that the PS4 has a clear advantage over the X1 in terms of on-paper specs

Your entire post, however, demonstrates precisely why you speak from this perspective: you're completely in anothe realm in reality. Buzz and word-of-mouth is massively in favor of PS4, always has been since the second the unveiling occurred. Microsoft, on the other hand, has spent nearly a year straight dealing with debilitating negative rumours about the XBO which in the end were mostly all true. Gamers reacted as violently as they ever had in the game industry, forcing them into a corner until they changed it. Then after that they spent months exaggerating features, attempting to muddy the truth about the spec wars because they don't want to admit how inferior the system is to PS4 and every day we get word of a new promised feature being delayed or move to some window into next year or beyond. INDIE GAMES won't even be there at launch. In 2013. We're in uncharted levels of incompetence at this point

Every poll taken shows the word-of-mouth/buzz is decisively in Sony's favor, all the leaked pre-order news we have gotten - and the few hard data we've gotten as well - shows a market that is also decisively in favor of PS4. They also sold out faster in most locations even though PS4 is going to have a much larger launch allotment!

So, what data are you using to determine the following:



What information are you using to determine this is the case? Since all the data we have suggest the precise opposite, are you simply living in a bubble, or do you intentionally not want to face reality?

It is true Microsoft has often been on people's lips since May 21, but in most occasions it was either negative news or adjustments to try to even make the system palatable to anyone at all other than the most diehard Microsoft obsessives. They say "there's no such thing as bad publicity", but this bullshit. There is a such thing, and Microsoft has been knee deep in it since the second news started leaking about the XBO. And it's all their fault, not gamers, not overreactions.

How this can be twisted into some positive for Microsoft is... well I don't know what it is. Maybe you didn't intend for that to be how your post was read. I don't know. But the end result is it's wildly inaccurate.

Once again your interpretation of what I said is completely wrong, the Xbox One may be all anyone ever talks about but I'm not for one moment trying to suggest it's under positive light, quite the opposite. Heard of the phrase "no news is bad news"? My point being if it's the hot topic then it will more likely be discussed in the media. There has been so much controversy over the specs of the Xbox One, the upclocks, Microsoft's own defense of the system etc. It's stands to reason there would be more articles covering this. Leadbetter already said in the recent interview with MS technical fellows that Sony don't really have to prove themselves at this point.

Again, I'm having a real hard time of seeing this supposed bias.

They don't make compelling arguments; they take things that are true and wildly exaggerate what they mean or intentionally muddy the waters so as to confuse the less technically inclined folk. And look at the success: you think comparing launch titles is how you benchmark a platform! You think that because you're incapable of analyzing a screen at a deeper level and understanding precisely how deep the differences go at a technical level - everything from most PS4 games being a higher resolution at average from the level of effects being quite last-gen (like how Forza 5 was caught out for its last-gen lighting or its short cut reflections, whereas DriveClub takes no real shortcuts when it comes to establishing next-gen lighting or environmental detail).

But in the end, even if every PS4 game looked worse than every XB1 launch game, it wouldn't mean anything.

● It is a fact PS4 is substantially more powerful and there is nothing XB1 can do to close that gap.
● It is a fact that the bullshit about XB1's 'balance' is being done to try to confuse the less technically inclined over how well designed the system is.
● After all, what does being 'balanced' really mean when all you've done is add an intense layer of extra complexity to development (prolonging dev time by all reports, thus more expensive and less efficient), have tools that are way behind PS4 and remain so, and even Phil Harrison himself directly implying that even their internal teams are complaining about it. What does it matter if the end result is a system that not only is more complex and expensive to develop for, but also is significantly less powerful in virtually every way we can measure?
● It also remains a fact that to this very day Microsoft PR continues to lie or exaggerate claims, delay promised features and have no perceivable clear direction for their system (at least none which they have done a good job at articulating), whereas Sony's vision has been clear from day one.
● Therefore, if we accept the above is true - and I don't know how you could say otherwise - then you also have to accept the skepticism that accompanies such a reality. How could anyone believe a case, no matter how convincing, if it has been disputed by virtually every developer and individual who knows about tech and specs, and the case is being stated by a company which at this point deserves njo trust?



A point of view that would make Microsoft proud. A thoroughly unscientific approach to comparisons is the only way they can even begin to try to close the gap, because they realize many people don't bother analyzing the technical specifics with any detail (or if they do, don't understand what they're reading or seeing anyway).

After all, Ryse may be 900p - and that may have a huge impact technically on what the engine can do - but to you, you would claim they look "technically superior", and that this adds merit to their argument.

It of course doesn't, most people involved in tech and specs know the shortcuts that are already being taken, and most of us have read what has been involved in developing multiplatform games. Every shred of evidence and every comment made on the subject that hasn't been vomited from Microsoft's mouth or those like Leadbetter running defense for them has been opposed to the bullshit narrative they've tried to paint around XBO. Originally they thought they could lie with the 40x more powerful thanks to CLOUD nonsense, but that was so violently rejected even the most arden Microsoft fanboys didn't believe it. So now they're taken to muddying the water in more specific and tantalizing ways, so as to confuse the audience they're attempting to impress.

And look how well it's working! SenjutsuSage hasn't been able to stop pretending like this nonsense has merit.

Are you technically adept enough to understand the true implications of their words? You claim they are muddying the water but are you qualified enough to make that statement? I felt they were being pretty direct and open (more so than Sony have been regarding specs, something DF also admitted), at what point of their discussion do you feel specifically muddies the water?

My overall point was this; the games speak for themselves and the X1 is not looking like a 30-40% weaker machine right now. Surely it would be if that were the case? Sony don't have complicated architecture to get to grips with here, these machines are similar enough in that we should be seeing the huge power differences quite clearly early at launch. I'm wondering why we are not? Please explain that to me.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Not owning a system doesn't stop someone from discussing what they hear about games being made for it. If someone is *categorically* not interested in games because they don't want the platform they're available for, I may disagree with that outlook, but that's not what I was trying to bring up. I would hope that brand and platform matters less than content, but that's something I don't really have an effect on. It sounds like you're saying that personally, price is the issue. Why the would you not react to games being made available for it over time? Will those games disappear as soon as you have the system? Will the system never drop in price?

Developers, now more than ever, are able to pay attention to how people react to their announcements. If you followed what I said, my issue isn't people who don't comment, it's people who in effect say "I didn't read it," or muck-up the conversation by making noise based on things other than the actual info in front of them. That's not a useful contribution, and (thankfully) it sounds like it doesn't apply to your situation.

I see no real reason to be excited for games only available on a console I may never own

Granted it is almost guaranteed I'll get an XB1 sometime next year things could change

I just don't see the point in getting involved in the discussion which might get me excited for a game I can't play

It would be disappointing to say the least

 

[bishoptl]

My overall point was this; the games speak for themselves and the X1 is not looking like a 30-40% weaker machine right now. Surely it would be if that were the case? Sony don't have complicated architecture to get to grips with here, these machines are similar enough in that we should be seeing the huge power differences quite clearly early at launch. I'm wondering why we are not? Please explain that to me.

Here you go

I've developed launch titles for 3 different gens now. You build to hit the window, not maximize the hardware. That comes later.

If you think

1- there will be no significant advances on either platform in the time after launch
2- hardware gaps won't make even more of a difference throughout the console cycle

Then you are either naive or just girding your e-loins for war.

You're welcome.

 

[2dshmuplover]

How about this? Respond to Amir0x's post. He said it better than I would, and I don't feel like typing a 2000 word response on my phone.

I only saw it just now, I'm from the UK and it was late when I posted that.

 

[Chobel]

Are you technically adept enough to understand the true implications of their words? You claim they are muddying the water but are you qualified enough to make that statement? I felt they were being pretty direct and open (more so than Sony have been regarding specs, something DF also admitted), at what point of their discussion do you feel specifically muddies the water?

I'm technically adept enough. and there' no such as "I feel", It's either true or not when talking about technical stuff. You wanna see some bullshit stuff they said read this http://translate.google.com.br/tran...ntrevista-da-microsoft-a-eurogamer/&sandbox=1

My overall point was this; the games speak for themselves and the X1 is not looking like a 30-40% weaker machine right now. Surely it would be if that were the case? Sony don't have complicated architecture to get to grips with here, these machines are similar enough in that we should be seeing the huge power differences quite clearly early at launch. I'm wondering why we are not? Please explain that to me.

If you're talking about exclusives: Ryse is 900p, Killer instict is 720p, dead rising has variable resolution, Forza use baked lighting. All PS4 exclusives are 1080p.

Multipat: we didn't see anything yet.

 

[phosphor112]

I'm technically adept enough. and there' no such as "I feel", It's either true or not when talking about technical stuff. You wanna see some bullshit stuff they said read this http://translate.google.com.br/tran...ntrevista-da-microsoft-a-eurogamer/&sandbox=1



If you're talking about exclusives: Ryse is 900p, Killer instict is 720p, dead rising has variable resolution, Forza use baked lighting. All PS4 exclusives are 1080p.

Multipat: we didn't see anything yet.

I liked his claim where KZSF used baked lighting.

 

[2dshmuplover]

Here you go


You're welcome.

Surely those rules apply to both systems equally? Why is it I can point to previous generations where the hardware was known to be superior and it was quite clearly evident in early launch tiles?

Examples I can give; (graphical highlights of launch games)

Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm on PS3 to Condemned and PGR 3 on Xbox 360.

Halo and Project Gotham Racing on Xbox vs. Timesplitters and Ridge Racer V on PS2 vs. Star Wars: Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion on Gamecube.

These games were a good indicator to the power of each machine and the difference we would see throughout the generation.

Further back there's Pilotwings 64 on Nintendo 64, WipEout on PS1 and Panzer Dragoon on Saturn. All pretty representative for their time in regards to each machine's technical capabilities in direct comparison to the competition. Why is it different now? Especially since the ambiguity of custom architecture is now a null point.

 

[Chobel]

I liked his claim where KZSF used baked lighting.

I copied your comment (in which you replied to him) in case he mentions pre-baked lighting.

Surely those rules apply to both systems equally? Why is it I can point to previous generations where the hardware was known to be superior and it was quite clearly evident in early launch tiles?

Examples I can give; (graphical highlights of launch games)

Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm on PS3 to Condemned and PGR 3 on Xbox 360.

Halo and Project Gotham Racing on Xbox vs. Timesplitters and Ridge Racer V on PS2 vs. Star Wars: Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion on Gamecube.

These games were a good indicator to the power of each machine and the difference we would see throughout the generation.

Further back there's Pilotwings 64 on Nintendo 64, WipEout on PS1 and Panzer Dragoon on Saturn. All pretty representative for their time in regards to each machine's technical capabilities in direct comparison to the competition. Why is it different now? Especially since the ambiguity of custom architecture is now a null point.

ffs, you can't compare exclusives.

 

[bishoptl]

Surely those rules apply to both systems equally? Why is it I can point to previous generations where the hardware was known to be superior and it was quite clearly evident in early launch tiles?

Examples I can give; (graphical highlights of launch games)

Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm on PS3 to Condemned and PGR 3 on Xbox 360.

Halo and Project Gotham Racing on Xbox vs. Timesplitters and Ridge Racer V on PS2 vs. Star Wars: Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion on Gamecube.

You're cherry picking exclusives vs 3rd party multiplats to support your fallacious argument, especially in the case of the PS2 vs Xbox and Gamecube, both of which came out roughly a year and a half later. That won't fly here - and unless you've developed a title of your own (launch or otherwise) I'll take your viewpoint for what it is.

 

[phosphor112]

I copied your comment (in which you replied to him) in case he mentions pre-baked lighting.



ffs, you can't compare exclusives.

It's funny, so far, the big Sony exclusives all feature heavy amounts of deferred rendering (aka dynamic lighting engines).

I think... even Rime does, as it seems to have a day/night cycles.

EDIT: I don't know if Knack does or not.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Surely those rules apply to both systems equally? Why is it I can point to previous generations where the hardware was known to be superior and it was quite clearly evident in early launch tiles?

Examples I can give; (graphical highlights of launch games)

Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm on PS3 to Condemned and PGR 3 on Xbox 360.

Halo and Project Gotham Racing on Xbox vs. Timesplitters and Ridge Racer V on PS2 vs. Star Wars: Rogue Leader and Luigi's Mansion on Gamecube.

These games were a good indicator to the power of each machine and the difference we would see throughout the generation.

Further back there's Pilotwings 64 on Nintendo 64, WipEout on PS1 and Panzer Dragoon on Saturn. All pretty representative for their time in regards to each machine's technical capabilities in direct comparison to the competition. Why is it different now? Especially since the ambiguity of custom architecture is now a null point.

Please let me know the objective method by which you compared this games

How can we measure the technical prowess of each system based on comparing completely different games?

 

[viveks86]

The only issue I have with this overview of the state of affairs is that it effectively justifies even the irrational and overly critical reactions to things.

You're absolutely right about the once bitten, twice shy element at play here. People dismissing the negativity toward Microsoft would be well served to think of it in those terms. My issue comes from the mixture of crocodile tears and a community accepting petty and lazy reactions to things in the hobby we all like.

Very well said. I had a similar reaction to Amir0x's post. Though all those points are valid, the overarching sentiment further polarizes opinions on this forum, thereby provoking lazy reactions amongst proponents of competing systems (though Amir0x's own posts are anything but lazy).

How should I as some one who will not buy an XB1 at that price point tell XB1 devs I find their games interesting?

The only thing that springs to mind would be buying the games without the system?

As that's the best way to show your enthusiasm

Honestly I just stay out of XB1 game threads for the most part unless the discussion is of technical nature about the XB1 itself

You might want to read Gestault's post again. The issue isn't about people not interested (and hence not commenting). It's not about people like you. It's about people who are interested purely for the sake of trashing a system and pooh pooh-ing any news that comes out without paying close attention to the actual details. It doesn't add anything constructive to the thread.

 

[LukasTaves]

MS: GDDR5 is uncomfortable.
Me: Why?
MS: Because ESRAM is BALANCED (shocker).
Me: No. Why is GDDR5 uncomfortable?
MS: It just is.
Me: Why?
MS: Because... The Xbox One is balanced.
Me: You're not answering the question.
MS: What question?
Me: Why is GDDR5 uncomfortable?
MS: Because we designed the Xbox One for balance.
Me: So how is GDDR5 unbalanced?
MS: Because ESRAM is balanced.
Me: What the fuck is wrong with you?
MS: have you seen the keys to our truck?

I am to the point I hope MS crashes and burns with X1. The amount of FUD is overwhelming. Statements without merit. Statements without factual evidence. Its disgusting. While I hope they fail I do hope another contender enters the ring to keep Sony on their toes. As much as I think Sony has changed, more competition is good. It is becoming evident, however, that MS will try ANYTHING to blur the lines on the battlefield. Tsk tsk tsk.

What are you talking about? It doesn't get much clear to explain their design goals than this:

Yeah, I think that's right. In terms of getting the best possible combination of performance, memory size, power, the GDDR5 takes you into a little bit of an uncomfortable place. Having ESRAM costs very little power and has the opportunity to give you very high bandwidth. You can reduce the bandwidth on external memory - that saves a lot of power consumption as well and the commodity memory is cheaper as well so you can afford more.

GDDR5 is uncomfortable because it costs more and makes the design draw more power. Embedded ram offers the bandwidth performance you want, and allows you to have save some bucks on the system memory and the system total power consumption.

Two different solutions to the same problem: Bandwidth. One is harder/costlier to put on a game console, the other is harder to develop for. They chose theirs and explained why.

 

[ethomaz]

GDDR5 is uncomfortable because it costs more and makes the design draw more power. Embedded ram offers the bandwidth performance you want, and allows you to have save some bucks on the system memory and the system total power consumption.

Two different solutions to the same problem: Bandwidth. One is harder/costlier to put on a game console, the other is harder to develop for. They chose theirs and explained why.

You are right until you stop to think the cheaper one is using the harder/costlier GDDR5... so the explanation lost the sense.

 

[ChainsawFilms]

GDDR5 is uncomfortable because it costs more and makes the design draw more power. Embedded ram offers the bandwidth performance you want, and allows you to have save some bucks on the system memory and the system total power consumption.

Two different solutions to the same problem: Bandwidth. One is harder/costlier to put on a game console, the other is harder to develop for. They chose theirs and explained why.

Memory costs for the PS4 are likely to come down very quickly. The embedded RAM in the XBone, they're stuck with that cost in silicon - as I understand it, it doesn't lend itself well to die shrinks.

 

[SwiftDeath]

You might want to read Gestault's post again. The issue isn't about people not interested (and hence not commenting). It's not about people like you. It's about people who are interested purely for the sake of trashing a system and pooh pooh-ing any news that comes out without paying close attention to the actual details. It doesn't add anything constructive to the thread.

But that constitutes trolling and I was under the impression Gestault was discussing other posters than those who would troll for the sake of it?

GDDR5 is uncomfortable because it costs more and makes the design draw more power. Embedded ram offers the bandwidth performance you want, and allows you to have save some bucks on the system memory and the system total power consumption.

Two different solutions to the same problem: Bandwidth. One is harder/costlier to put on a game console, the other is harder to develop for. They chose theirs and explained why.

So basically GDDR5 puts MS in an uncomfortable position because their console already costs too much?

Power drain is likely to be of minimal difference between DDR3 and GDDR5 memory so all that is left is cost and Sony have shown it is very possibly to make a great console with it built in

 

[J-Rzez]

My overall point was this; the games speak for themselves and the X1 is not looking like a 30-40% weaker machine right now. Surely it would be if that were the case? Sony don't have complicated architecture to get to grips with here, these machines are similar enough in that we should be seeing the huge power differences quite clearly early at launch. I'm wondering why we are not? Please explain that to me.

Usually launch titles aren't a good example, especially this gen where we're not really seeing that NES -> SNES or PS1->PS2->PS3 jump in power as things are more nuanced without a jump in hardware like each before had. That doesn't mean we're not seeing anything that wasn't doable on old hardware mind you. Anyways, launch titles are typically those designed more in mind to be there on release day, where a "day" is targeted more than the overall product seemingly. They may feature some new and cool things, but it's always the follow ups that show where the differences lay. Differences out there with launch titles will probably be things like resolution and framerate, and not so much about bells and whistles.

Where you'll see the differences is games out of the launch window, and especially by the better developers. Let alone if one machine is substantially more powerful, and has the better developers. Those are the titles that will open eyes.

 

[TheRealTalker]

Usually launch titles aren't a good example, especially this gen where we're not really seeing that NES -> SNES or PS1->PS2->PS3 jump in power as things are more nuanced without a jump in hardware like each before had. That doesn't mean we're not seeing anything that wasn't doable on old hardware mind you. Anyways, launch titles are typically those designed more in mind to be there on release day, where a "day" is targeted more than the overall product seemingly. They may feature some new and cool things, but it's always the follow ups that show where the differences lay. Differences out there with launch titles will probably be things like resolution and framerate, and not so much about bells and whistles.

Where you'll see the differences is games out of the launch window, and especially by the better developers. Let alone if one machine is substantially more powerful, and has the better developers. Those are the titles that will open eyes.

I can't wait for 2014.... Also your avatar 10/10

 

[2dshmuplover]

I'm technically adept enough. and there' no such as "I feel", It's either true or not when talking about technical stuff. You wanna see some bullshit stuff they said read this http://translate.google.com.br/tran...ntrevista-da-microsoft-a-eurogamer/&sandbox=1



If you're talking about exclusives: Ryse is 900p, Killer instict is 720p, dead rising has variable resolution, Forza use baked lighting. All PS4 exclusives are 1080p.

Multipat: we didn't see anything yet.

I agree, that's because I am not personally technically adept enough to grasp the true implication of their words. This is why I said to a large degree what I am saying is subjective. People can argue what games look better till they are blue in the face, ultimately we will all have our own opinion and that's what counts.

You choose to highlight every negative aspect of the X1 exclusives, yet Killzone SF uses prebaked global illumination, who cares if it looks great? Resogun looks nice on PS4 and is using some cool techniques with those voxels, a lot of people are talking about that but what about Project Spark? a game made entirely from them and not a polygon in sight. Crimson Dragon runs 1080p60 and is looking gorgeous too. Forza 5 uses IBL and SSS both of which are fully dynamic, you made a point earlier suggesting it was only used on the cars but they are the only things moving on the track, it's not needed elsewhere.

I also think to suggest all PS4 executives are rendering at 1080p is a bit of an assumption on your part, in only recently came to light that Sony had been using PC's to demo their games at E3 (and more recent events) after all. Let's wait and see, if I'm not mistaken, Deep Down renders at 720p. Drive Club and Knack also only run at 30fps.

 

[JaggedSac]

I'm technically adept enough. and there' no such as "I feel", It's either true or not when talking about technical stuff. You wanna see some bullshit stuff they said read this http://translate.google.com.br/tran...ntrevista-da-microsoft-a-eurogamer/&sandbox=1

The translation is shit, but from what I can gather they only discussed 2 things from the interview, and the first one doesn't even make sense. Are they saying MS will not be going lower than 10% in the future for GPU allocation for Kinect and snapped apps?

As for the second one, the grammar was so bad on the translation that I can even glean what they are trying to say.

 

[DBT85]

Power drain is likely to be of minimal difference between DDR3 and GDDR5 memory so all that is left is cost and Sony have shown it is very possibly to make a great console with it built in

The power issue might be the case now, but back when they started thinking about ram quantities GDDR5 I'm sure ran at higher voltages than the 1.35v modules we've seen in the more recent past and so power consumption as well as availability of the required size chips would have made DDR3 the solution they wanted.

If they hadn't been so determined to have 8GB from the off, they could and probably would have gone GDDR5 themselves.

only recently came to light that Sony had been using PC's to demo their games at E3 (and more recent events) after all.

Clearly I missed this. Thread link please.

 

[Tookay]

Surely those rules apply to both systems equally? Why is it I can point to previous generations where the hardware was known to be superior and it was quite clearly evident in early launch tiles?

No they don't. Because one console has a higher ceiling than the other.

You cannot just declare a false equivalence and settle it there.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

I think a lot of people -- Xbox fans especially -- get upset because, while the cynicism towards MS is most certainly deserved, it can get a little excessive. You, Amir0x, don't seem to do that. Your posts are mostly level-headed, but that is not true for a lot of GAF. Please do not tell me that the constant making fun of MS and the Xbox brand constitute "interesting discussion." I know you aren't, but that's partially what spawns all this "persecution complex" that people (most of whom haven't a clue as to what the term means) are seeing.

Some say "well it's not like Sony didn't get the same treatment in the PS3's early days." So they did. But that's not the point. This constant making fun of companies (deserved or not) is unnecessary, suffocating to intelligent and interesting discussion, and really isn't all that funny besides. That thread about the Xbox employees who couldn't open a lock on their SUV is a perfect example.

I just think that the negativity has gotten way out of hand.



I suffer from the same problem and usually resort to the same methods as you.

I like your posts, at any rate.

You make a good point. Arguments and criticism are of course always welcome, but there is a line that is sometimes crossed and that only serves to diminish the credibility of Gaf

To be fair though, claiming biased towards Sony every time anything related to Xbox is criticized is also wrong and has been happening more and more lately.

 

[Tsundere]

I also think to suggest all PS4 executives are rendering at 1080p is a bit of an assumption on your part, in only recently came to light that Sony had been using PC's to demo their games at E3 (and more recent events) after all. Let's wait and see, if I'm not mistaken, Deep Down renders at 720p. Drive Club and Knack also only run at 30fps.

*facepalm*

 

[viveks86]

But that constitutes trolling and I was under the impression Gestault was discussing other posters than those who would troll for the sake of it?

I guess that depends on the motivation for being overly critical. In my opinion, trolling is when people do it either with an agenda, or just for kicks. There are others who do it because they genuinely don't think much of the system and let that feeling cloud their judgment and commentary.

 

[nib95]

Here you go


You're welcome.

Makes sense. Thanks for the insight.

 

[Tookay]

You make a good point. Arguments and criticism are of course always welcome, but there is a line that is sometimes crossed and that only serves to diminish the credibility of Gaf

You make the mistake of assuming a bustling online forum with diverse posters, thoughts, and agendas should have a single source of credibility to begin with.

 

[viveks86]

Power drain is likely to be of minimal difference between DDR3 and GDDR5 memory so all that is left is cost and Sony have shown it is very possibly to make a great console with it built in

I would really like to see some differences in wattage for these two types of memory. Such a claim from MS should be easy to corroborate or dismiss with all the evidence out there right? Can anyone point out some links that could help us learn what the power consumption characteristics are?

 

[killatopak]

What are you talking about? It doesn't get much clear to explain their design goals than this:



GDDR5 is uncomfortable because it costs more and makes the design draw more power. Embedded ram offers the bandwidth performance you want, and allows you to have save some bucks on the system memory and the system total power consumption.

Two different solutions to the same problem: Bandwidth. One is harder/costlier to put on a game console, the other is harder to develop for. They chose theirs and explained why.

Skeff already posted earlier how DDR3 and GDDR5 voltages are essentially the same. Add the power consumption of the ESRAM then roles are reversed and DDR3+ESRAM combo is actually consuming more power than the GDDR5. Plus surely, you can't dismiss what I posted earlier which I said that this cost them valuable die space which is why Xbox One's GPU is inferior to Sony's. You definitely can't dismiss of the effects of choosing what memory architecture you implement.

IMO DDR3+ESRAM combo in the one uncomfortable purely because it took up valuable die space.

EDIT: Oh, banned. Did he do anything bad?

 

[Crisco]

They really really really need to stop talking about specs.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

You make the mistake of assuming a bustling online forum with diverse posters, thoughts, and agendas should have a single source of credibility to begin with.

It's not what I believe but that is how it is perceived from the outside like it or not

 

[omonimo]

I agree, that's because I am not personally technically adept enough to grasp the true implication of their words. This is why I said to a large degree what I am saying is subjective. People can argue what games look better till they are blue in the face, ultimately we will all have our own opinion and that's what counts.

You choose to highlight every negative aspect of the X1 exclusives, yet Killzone SF uses prebaked global illumination, who cares if it looks great? Resogun looks nice on PS4 and is using some cool techniques with those voxels, a lot of people are talking about that but what about Project Spark? a game made entirely from them and not a polygon in sight. Crimson Dragon runs 1080p60 and is looking gorgeous too. Forza 5 uses IBL and SSS both of which are fully dynamic, you made a point earlier suggesting it was only used on the cars but they are the only things moving on the track, it's not needed elsewhere.

I also think to suggest all PS4 executives are rendering at 1080p is a bit of an assumption on your part, in only recently came to light that Sony had been using PC's to demo their games at E3 (and more recent events) after all. Let's wait and see, if I'm not mistaken, Deep Down renders at 720p. Drive Club and Knack also only run at 30fps.

I'm not that sure... what do you trying to convince the others (or more yourself)? Delight us, please. Xbone has the same power of ps4? Or not count at the end? Well, considering it costs 100$ more, a lot of people will care... In any case the bolded part contradict the whole your assumption, I'm not so sure where are you trying to lean the discussion, is not that clear.

 

[2dshmuplover]

You're cherry picking exclusives vs 3rd party multiplats to support your fallacious argument, especially in the case of the PS2 vs Xbox and Gamecube, both of which came out roughly a year and a half later. That won't fly here - and unless you've developed a title of your own (launch or otherwise) I'll take your viewpoint for what it is.

I'm not claiming to be coming into this with "raw facts" and had I help develop titles myself within the industry it would not support my claims any more than it already does. Of course, it is subjective, my opinion, I'm not claiming it's anything else.

People can say I cannot compare them but in regards to what each console is technically capable of it serves it's purpose. I can see that, perhaps you can not and I accept that.

I would actually argue the point that exclusives are a better indicator of power differences and that you cannot directly compare multiplatform games since they are often designed with parity in mind.

 

[viveks86]

You make a good point. Arguments and criticism are of course always welcome, but there is a line that is sometimes crossed and that only serves to diminish the credibility of Gaf

You make the mistake of assuming a bustling online forum with diverse posters, thoughts, and agendas should have a single source of credibility to begin with.

Agree with this. Don't think the credibility of Gaf is at stake here. I think we are simply discussing how such posts can influence the course of a thread.