DICE comments of PS4 vs Xbox One Comparison, says PC is Always Better

DICE Vice President, Karl Magnus has commented on one of the hottest gaming issue on internet, comparison between "PS4 and Xbox One" RAM memory and the amount of memory allocated especially for games (7GB is reserve for games in case of PS4 whereas only 5GB is reserve in case of Xbox One).

The story is too old to be commented.
Tatsuya 1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

It's a comparison between the next gen consoles. PC wasn't even suppose to be part of the discussion..

I'm looking forward to play BF4 on my PS4 with 64 players! It's going to be fukin awesome!

CalamityCB1501d ago

The fun of 64 players dies down after you figure out it is a immense cluster fuck which only works on open maps "COUGH COUGH OPERATIONMETRO COUGH COUGH"

It's about time Xbox+Playstation gamers get to experience the FULL battlefield experience.

Dazel1501d ago

Some of the smaller maps on PC BF3 with 64 players are just terrible. To many players running around like headless chickens.

JsonHenry1501d ago

^^ I agree. Which is why I don't play certain maps if 64 players are enabled.

Fishy Fingers1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

Calamity is correct in what he says, although when you consider Operation Metro is probably the most popular map (especially pre CC DLC) you have to conclude, a lot of people enjoy a good old fashioned cluster f***.

Joy of online gaming, mainly found on PC, server filters.

MWong1501d ago

Agreed, I am just happy console players get to a broader BF experience on the next-gen consoles. Nothing in this article is new news, BF is a PC game.

If Operation Metro is one of those confirmed DLC maps I hope they update. I also would love an updated Arica Harbor, Panama Canal and Atacama Desert from BC2.

andibandit1500d ago

"The fun of 64 players dies down"

Never, the chaos is part of the fun

Lior1500d ago

the 64 player operation metro is awesome, lots of players to get kills

DeadlyFire1500d ago (Edited 1500d ago )

Well in Battlefield 2 maps were scalable changed sizes for the amount of players. Some how that didn't happen in Battlefield 3 at all. 64 players = same map size. 8 players = same map size.

I think they left that feature out due to console limitations.

Crazy Larry1500d ago

This article is so poorly done. It skipped Karls main comment. This interview came out today in the August Game Informer. The sentence right after this he started talking about Microsofts Cloud, and that even though it's early in the stages, he believes it will be able to scale like PC's do, progressively making games better over time. His answer was far more focused on MS's Cloud service over this "PC is always better" crap. The title is very misleading.

windblowsagain1500d ago

I agree about the carnage, but tbh metro isn't a great map anyway. But it's fun with alot of people. Reminds me of killzone2 carnage in small area's.

But yeah open world maps are awesome with alot of players.

JunioRS1011500d ago

Ya as a pc player i was so excited about 64 players til i got in a 64 player small map game which isn't really even fun. average lifespan drops to like 30 seconds.

Operation metro, but also grand bazaar

Crazy Larry1500d ago (Edited 1500d ago )

Here's the best I could do. (tinypic url)
Karl goes to say that it will interesting to see PC scalability possible on consoles because of Xbox cloud computing.

I'm not trying to make this a PS4 vs X1 debate; I'm just saying this interview was not about the superiority of PC's, which is what this misleading headline is stating.

pixelsword1500d ago (Edited 1500d ago )

MAG never felt clustered, even on the 256 player Domination stages. Domination in the last sections felt good playing either when winning or losing because a good board design will prevent that clustered feeling.

jairusmonillas1500d ago

Huh? that's weird below 32 is borefest. 64 players is the best experience. you probably haven't experienced 64 players yet :P

InTheZoneAC1500d ago

funny, on ps3 I quit the room once I saw it was operation metro as the next map.

I thought the map was garbage and I hardly ever played anything outside of Conquest

NegativeCreepWA1500d ago

AT first I didn't like Metro with 64 players, but once I got rid of the urge to always push forward like on consoles, I started to like it.

It's a big tug of war match, you need a large amount of people to all push forward at once to gain any ground. If any thing, it takes a lot team work to push forward.

1nsomniac1500d ago

I agree, I always set my maximum players to 48. Thats more than enough there's no need for more then that as it just ends up spoiling the game as it turns it from a BF playstyle to a COD playstyle.

modesign1500d ago

battlefield MP is 10 players shooting themselves and the rest waiting for their turn on the fighter jets.

fr0sty1500d ago

The headline is misleading. He said "Naturally we’re very excited now seeing consoles that actually close in on what the PCs of today can do...", meaning there won't be much difference between the PC and console versions. He then goes on to say that (naturally) PC will gain an edge on the consoles "as time goes on". That is to be expected.

The real meat of his statement is the acknowledgement that the PS4's tech advantages don't just exist "on paper" as some others have tried to suggest.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 1500d ago
nukeitall1501d ago

Why no PC talk?

It is a viable platform like any other.

Fact of the matter is, PC will almost always be superior and if it isn't it will be shortly afterwards.

However, PCs have it's own set of problems, but that is for another discussion.

CBaoth1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

unless it's a ham-fisted cashed-in port, it will ALWAYS be the best version. That's not a knock on console gaming. I don't need a comparison article pointing out some jaggies on an elbow to re-affirm my purchase (I know that's not quite the case here). I only need know if it's a shit port amigo.

starchild1500d ago

Because he is biased. Playstation fanboys like to hate on Xbox and Wii owners and the PC kind of gets in the way of that. This pisses them off.

They want to hate on the other consoles and act superior to the other console fanboys with impunity. So they have to bash the PC and pretend that it doesn't really matter or count.

GDDR6_20141500d ago

Because Sony fanboys can only talk specs and graphics to MS and Nintendo fanboys, just look at the comment section on next gen consoles articles

striped941500d ago


Noone hates on PC because it gets in the way of bashing. I can completely agree that a PC with relatively current hardware will always be better than consoles. My current rig is an FX processor with an HD 6850, and I get decent performance. However, I only plan on upgrading my system very slowly or slightly over the next few years.

My next console will be the PS4. It's just too expensive for my liking, and I like the fact that consoles offer the better social aspect of playing with more friends and people you know. The GPU is a pretty strong upper-mid range in todays standards, and with optimization I imagine I'll be more than content with it's performance.

Nafon1500d ago

He was asked about PS4 vs XB1, not PS4 vs XB1 vs PC. He probably wanted to remain unbiased, so he just avoided the question and said PC is best lol. I'm sure he could have answered the question, but he chose not to, and that's OK.

Silly Mammo1500d ago

Consoles are a closed platform whereas a PC is an upgradeable platform. That's why PC's should be excluded when talking about the PS4/X1/WiiU.

dcj05241500d ago

Think about it this way. For $400 your getting a high-end PC worth at least $800. It'll be able to run games at the highest settings and (hopefully, gotta optimize right) in 1080p for the next 2-3 years. It gets exclusives that the PC will never have ( PC has exclusives too obviously) and most likley have more people= more support. Consoles don't get that bad until the last 2-3 years of its life when the PC is a much better investment because you can build a $350 PC that outperforms PS3&360 for the last 2-3 years.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1500d ago
Colzer011501d ago

because no matter what PS4 is gonna lose to PC, and this site couldn't afford Sony brand is getting a trash talk

imchuckbass1501d ago ShowReplies(6)
limewax1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

PC wasn't part of the discussion? Pretty sure the DICE VP was directly speaking about PC himself, whether or not it sits well with you for a discussion isn't the topic of the interview.

BF will always remain superior on the PC if only due to the continued community activity well beyond the lifespan on consoles. Playing BFBC2 on 360 prior to BF3 wasn't fun, unless you like 2v2.

Only once did consoles get an advantage over PC with BF and that was due to the omission of VOIP in BF3, which still wasn't enough to stop it from being the best version to play. If they ditched Origin would be nice too.

thechosenone1501d ago

So then it's PC>PS4>XB1. >:D

AliTheSnake11500d ago (Edited 1500d ago )

PC should never be compared to Consoles.
Because PS4 and X1 are optimized PCs. You can have a PC that is worse than a ps2 and you can have one straight from NASA. PS4 and X1 are fixed. All copies will work and look the same way, any flaw is not your fault it's the developer's. That is not true for PC. People have different Rams and graphics cards. Go to any forum of any Popular PC game. All you see is, people asking why is this running this way and why is that running that way, and how to do this and what option to turn on and off to get specific performance.