Why the resolution of a game won’t matter to most players who pick either the PS4 or the Xbox One.
And why nobody cares if you don't. smh.
"There’s no denying that on paper the PS4 is the more powerful console but it will most probably be years before that advantage is fully realized" Funny, the comparison videos I've seen tell a different story. What's even funnier is that how the guy opens up saying that there is a great looking game running on 720p... TLOU, which isn't even a next gen game. He ends saying "similar arguments were held at the dawn of the current generation with the PS3 being again the more powerful console technically but that didn't lead to better looking games than on Xbox 360 in the majority of cases" The thing is that now it's equally easier to develop for both consoles (it even seems that it's easier to develop for the PS4) and that plus being more powerful will give the PS4 a huge advantage, because if you have the same game for both consoles, and one looks better than the other, chances are that you will go with the better looking product. People can keep talking about how resolution doesn't matter that much, whatever helps them sleep at night, but graphics can be a huge part when it comes to gaming
"There’s no denying that on paper the PS4 is the more powerful console but it will most probably be years before that advantage is fully realized" Except, that advantage has already been realized and it's only launch. You know I think it's because the advantage the 360 had over the PS3, it's a giant hard pill for them to swallow how much more powerful the PS4 is over the Xbone, on paper or not. And honestly the PS3 vs the Xbox 360 was hard to compare given how vastly different the architectures were. But now the PS4 and Xbone are an apples to apples comparison... PS4: 32 ROPS 25.6 Gigapixels/sec 1152 Shader Cores 1.84 TFLOPS Xbox One: 16 ROPS 12.8 Gigapixels/s 768 Shader Cores 1.23 TFLOPS It's like saying a 500HP car is faster than a 350HP car. It's FACT. It's PROVEN. It's REALITY.
@Heavy Took the words out my mouth...lol Especially surprised he compared the TLOU to a next gen game...
@sarcasm That's a very poor analogy, a 350hp car could be faster than a 500hp car. They're called dynamics. Just cause you think something to be true, doesn't mean it is.
^Sorry I should add if given everything else is equal. A 500hp mustang that weighs 3200lbs with a cof drag of .30 is faster than a 350hp mustang that weighs 3200lbs with a cof drag of .30. Satisfied? And yes you're right, just because you think something is true doesn't mean it is. Like the hordes of Xbox fans thinking 720p is clearer than 1080p, or the Xbox One is as powerful as the PS4. :)
Well it led to better looking games in the hands of developers that knew how to use the better hardware. Just need to look at many of the exclusives and even multiplatform games started to look better on it in recent years like Portal 2 from a company that despised the PS3 or now BF4. The PS3 was horrible to develop for and devs were not bothered in learning how to use it properly and instead made cheap ports from the 360 version to the PS3. Now with the PS4 being easier to develop for and having better hardware they will either have the PC or the PS4 as lead platform and port it to the Xbone. The gap might not be huge in regards to multiplatform games in the future but the exclusives will show a bigger gap. Also all the games coming out in the near future are designed for a system that has 4GB RAM and not optimized for the upgraded amount of RAM.
I care but its not a deal breaker, especially when we know like every other generation things will improve, hell the dev's themselves pretty much confirmed time constraints and things being finalized late affected their optimization on X1.
Not a deal breaker for me either, but luckily I don't have to worry about it either way. Things will improve on the PS4 as well, and as far as time constraints it's releasing two weeks sooner so they had time constraints there as well. Personally I think the gap is just going to continue to grow over time.
Well not really ps4 was final hardware specs etc were finished months ago. Sure ps4 is more powerful but I think people are really underestimating micro if they don't think we will start seeing most games on both at 1080p, its early that's all.
Alright, I'll give you that. Truth is, we don't know until the developers start learning how to optimize each system. Either way, until then both sides are gonna be getting great games and awesome experiences. This is going to be an awesome generation to be a gamer!!
Heres a fact for you tho, that is as true as the sun is hot, Hypothetically speaking if we have an identical game being made for the Xbone and the PS4 and the game gets made as completely perfectly as it can with no problems what so ever for each console and they both get maxed out the final product WILL perform better on the PS4.
Here's another one too while we're at it. Let's look at some of the first party development studios. Sony definitely has the upper hand in this department as well. Regardless of resolution, they can make games that are absolutely stunning. Not trying to sound like a fanboy, but I guarantee Sony has the upper hand all around this gen. Just wait till the pre-launch blowout the night before official release in the US. By the time all the announcements are over by the end of the VGAs I bet a lot of people are gonna be kinda mad at the side they chose :)
ps4 has a much better gpu, why wouldn't I care?
I don't care because I pre-ordered a PS4.
Agreed. Hopefully developers are eventually able to figure out the Xbone and get their games to run on it as well as they run on the PS4. But since I won't be buying a 'bone anyway, it won't affect me regardless.
You people change your tune quicker than your benefactors at Microsoft.
"Bigpappy + 23h ago I don't believe ESRAM has anything to do with it. If it is under performing, it will more likely be the way the recourses are split among the 2 OS and Kinect. X1 is doing a lot more than the PS4 with its resources. Most developers are very familiar with ESRAM. It requires the same techniques as those used on the 360. #1.4 (Edited 23h ago) | Agree(15) | Disagree(107) | Report | Reply" Confirmed today by Call of Duty developer. Can easily be fixed by firmware when M$ re-allocates resources.
they cant fix the weaker gpu.
Exactly. They could put GDDR5 and it wouldn't matter. The GPU is the real bottleneck.
and imagine the gap the 2 consoles will have when games start using gpu compute, the ps4 will always out perform the xbone unless gimped on purpose, there is no magic driver that will upgrade the gpu in the xbone or upgrade the ddr3 ram either its a done deal, im not saying the xbone wont have good games but the ps4 will have the graphical edge this whole gen.
"X1 is doing a lot more than the PS4 with its resources" Thats where your 107 disagrees came from. You're on N4G remember.
No, it is not the ESRAM. It is the DDR3 itself. The ESRAM is the "patch" to the DD3 low bandwidth. But it is too small. 32 MB is not enough for the necessary frame buffer required for the current techniques to use deferred lighting at 1080. Devs would need at least 64 MB. But then there would be issues with space, heating and somthing with the GPU (couldn't really get the "die thing" in the GPU).
It`s actually 3 OS. The Xbone is doing more with it`s resources but it`s also a lot more that is unimportant for gaming and a waste of resources for a gaming console. Does a gaming console need the feature to Skype and play games at the same time? No, because it would be hugely distracting to Skype with somebody while playing any game. Devs are familiar with ESRAM, but the 360 had 512MB of total RAM without taking away the RAM the system used. That`s compared to a system that has 32MB of ESRAM while having 5GB of RAM for games with games that have better graphics and move a huge amount of data around the system constantly. So that`s 32MB that can be used to store data of games that might use a maximum of 5GB. In that respect the ESRAM is too small to make a big difference and as said it`s their because the DDR3 is crap for any kind of graphics data (it`s better for the multitasking stuff like snap). On top of that they gimped the GPU to make space for the ESRAM because there is limited space and they had to reduce the size of the GPU to fit the ESRAM on the chip. Obviously the CoD guys would never say that the console isn`t great given the deal they got with MS. Having resources reallocated means taking away resources from the 3 OS and/or Kinect and potentially causing the system to get unstable unless they have resources locked away that are not used by games and not used by the system at all. In that case it would be questionable why they do that in the first place. the 360 OS had it`s OS footprint reduced over years to free up more resources at the cost of making the system slower and very sluggish. It`s a combination of issues that cause the difference.
Ok. I don't know how technical you guys are, but you need to stop looking at the embedded RAM as MEMORY. Try to see in more as a north bridge between the RAM and GPU. It serves to expand the address bus and the data bus. so it transfer data from more than one memory bank at a time to increase bandwidth. Hope that helped a little. I am not here to say that higher resolution is not better. I am saying that I happen to get more out of features and comfort than I do resolution. Resolution is just one feature.
Yes the ESRAM is there as a bridge to make up for the DDR3. The problem is it`s only 32MB. The 360 had 10MB for 512MB RAM. So at any time you could store a total of 10MB in the embedded RAM out of 512MB of data that is going around in the system (not even deducting yet the RAM the OS requires). Now you have a pool of 32MB to hold and move data out of a total of up to 5GB that is moving around at any given time in the system. For the ESRAM to be as effective as it was on the 360 it would have needed to scale more in relation to the RAM, but that`s not the case because it was not an option. The embedded RAM was increased 3 times from 10MB to 32 MB. The RAM was increased by around 10 from 512MB (without the OS deducted) to 5GB (for games only and RAM needed by OS and Kinect deducted). The ESRAM wouldn`t need to be 128MB just 64MB would have made a much bigger difference than the 32MB. Problem is there wasn`t space for that much ESRAM on the chip and they couldn`t do that. Especially graphical data like textures need to be processed very fast and moving this around the system through the DDR3 and ESRAM is quite a disadvantage. The PS4 games haven`t even been optimized yet for the higher RAM that they upgraded earlier this year from 4GB to 8GB.
"Resolutiongate And Why I Don’t Care" ... "because I'm a blind fool."
I really don't care so much as long as they're close to each other, but I do appreciate the quality of studios like naughty dog. Give us uncharted 4.
Pretty much anyone not biased and knows tech will tell you the gap will only get bigger in a year or 2 its a guarantee.
Let them speak all they want. I'm here for game experience not strictly visuals.
Higher resloution means less jaggies means, better appreciation for what you are looking at. I care.
Lol guy says he dont care.... Writes a story about it.... Yeppp you dont care soo much i see
The resolution issue is about paying more for less. It seems that the roles have been reversed. Now the Xbox gamers will have inferior multiplats while PS4 gamers enjoy better looking games for the same price.
It won't be a deal breaker but it doesn't change the fact it's extremely sad for a supposed next gen console not to be powerful enough to run all games at 1080p. Especially so when Ghosts doesn't even look visually impressive to begin with. I'm sorry but I'm scratching my head as to how the Xbox One is supposed to last a full generation cycle when games like Ghosts can't run in native 1080p