Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by DPAD Dave 751d ago | news

Square responds to Tomb Raider framerate-gate: 'Anything beyond 30fps is gravy'

Square Enix has responded to this morning's reports that Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition runs at 60fps on PlayStation 4 and only 30fps on Xbox One, stating that "anything beyond 30fps for [Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition] is gravy". (PS4, Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition, Xbox One)

« 1 2 »
GarrusVakarian  +   751d ago | Funny
Mmmmmm, GravyStation 4.
Mikelarry  +   751d ago | Well said
lol i wish one of these developers would just balls up and say " with the hardware we were provided we could get x amount from this console, don't blame us for what we were able achieve with the tools provided to us"
#1.1 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(132) | Disagree(16) | Report | Reply
mewhy32  +   751d ago
I agree with mike. I hope that they don't start watering down games because of the lowest common denominator. I mean they should push BOTH consoles to the max so that we get the best experience available from the given console that we're playing on not letting one hold the other back.
Ripsta7th  +   751d ago
Mewhy32- i thinks its too late for that now, the public alredy knows the ps4 is more powerful, if in the future we see watered down games we will know why(MS,Money)
Death  +   751d ago
Or lack of interest from gamers. If you want to see the PS4 continue to benefit, buy the games. If more people buy the PS4 version of Tomb Raider it will set an example for all devs to see. If less buy it on the PS4, devs may be more inclined to make the games identical if cost is a factor.
-Foxtrot  +   751d ago
This is why I'm scared developers aren't going to take advantage of the PS4...and I mean third party devs.

They ask for better tec and then when they have it they decide not to use it incase it "upsets" someone.

The thing is with higher up developers like...oh I don't know lets say Rockstar for this example, they have the upper hand because of how respected they are as a company and how many copies their games sell....why the hell would Microsoft get p***** off with them if they told the truth, they can't at the end of the day since they need Rockstar more then they need them especially when the PS4 is selling more this gen (so far) and seems more popular, so Rockstar would gain their sales regardless since more people would buy a PS4 to buy their game.

I mean what are MS going to say to someone like them, tell them off for their silly policy about not letting games on their consoles if they are better on another.....would they REALLY give up something like GTA 6, Red Dead 3 or even Bully 2 for their consoles and make it seem like it's a PS4 exclusive which would gain the PS4 more sales.

I don't think so

So the fact is higher up devs like Rockstar, Irrational, Valve, Konami etc have the upper hand. Once they start to stick up for themselves then smaller devs and Indies will follow.
#1.1.4 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(16) | Report
AliTheSnake1  +   751d ago
60fps is good , only if its stable. In most cases, it's not, specially in third persons where the drops are highly noticeable. Like Contrast on ps4, its 60fps but it drops frequently.

For high Tech People out there I have a question, why is it always 60fps or 30fps ? Why not lock some games at 40 or 45 for example ? fast enough to feel smooth and low enough to avoid high drops and apply more effects.
mhunterjr  +   751d ago
I don't get it. Isn't that what they are saying when they release two versions of a game that perform differently?
Spenok  +   751d ago
It would be nice to see brutal honesty out of a dev. However it makes sense that they wouldn't. As it could potentially muddy their relationship with a console manufacturer. Which in the end wouldn't be worth it for the developer. You generally only hear that stuff from indie devs as they have less to lose.
admiralvic  +   751d ago
"lol i wish one of these developers would just balls up and say " with the hardware we were provided we could get x amount from this console, don't blame us for what we were able achieve with the tools provided to us""

Thats basically saying F U to M$ and telling people to blame M$ for their short comings, not themselves. Even if it is true, there will always be developers that get more out of the system and maybe because the PS4 is assumed to have more raw power, it takes less actual effort to achieve things like this and thus it happens, versus more effort on the XB1.
gman_moose  +   751d ago
Microsoft won't have it- that's why the devs are tight lipped and diplomatic in their answers. Say anything negative about Xbox, and MS takes their ball and goes home. They must be absolutely steaming about the better performance devs are achieving from PS4. They take the same stance against Indie devs who for whatever reason decide to release a game on Sony first... MS says don't even bother if we don't get it first, or at least at the same time.
ShwankyShpanky  +   751d ago
@Ali: "60fps is good , only if its stable. In most cases, it's not, specially in third persons where the drops are highly noticeable."

True, but even games that target 30fps often have stutters and drops.

"why is it always 60fps or 30fps"

Because it syncs better with TV refresh rates, which are generally 60Hz or 120Hz.
starchild  +   751d ago | Helpful

I'm a PC gamer that loves 60fps+, but at the same time I agree with you that it needs to be smooth. I would take a solid 30fps over a framerate that is 60fps 75% of the time but frequently drops into the 40s.

The reason why developers usually either target 30fps or 60fps is due to the fact that most displays are 60hz (or multiples of that). So, framerates have to be able to evenly divide into 60 in order to be in sync with the refresh rate of the display.

You could have a frame rate at 20fps, but that simply doesn't give you smooth enough motion or controller response.

With a 60hz display a solid 60fps is ideal. This results in one unique frame for each time the screen updates itself. Frame rates higher than 60fps would be wasted on a 60hz display since the display is only refreshing 60 times a second anyway.

The only exception to this would be if you turn off v-sync, in which case you would be able to perceive smoother animation and less latency in the controls at frame rates above 60fps even though the display was only displaying 60 of those frames per second.

The downside, of course, is that you would get screen tearing. Many people, including me, hate screen tearing so it's much better to use v-sync and limit your framerate to 60fps on a 60hz display.

Anyway, as to why you can't just cap the frame rate at 40 or 45fps, well technically you can. On my PC I can cap the frame rate at any rate I want using tools like RadeonPro.

The problem is, capping the frame rate at 40fps results in judder. 40 doesn't divide evenly into 60.

With 60fps you have one unique frame for each time the screen refreshes. It could be represented as: 111111111111
(the 1s representing unique frames)

30fps also works fairly well because you simply have one unique frame followed by a duplicate frame: 101010101010
(1s are unique frames, 0s are duplicates)

The problem with 40fps is that the frame interval will be irregular. It would look like: 110110110110110110
In other words, there would be two unique frames followed by a duplicate. This would result in judder.

But at least the judder would occur in a regular pulsed cadence.

When a frame rate is unlocked however the frame intervals become highly erratic. For example: 110100110100011110110011100
This results in an extremely annoying, highly random judder.

This is the reason Nvidia developed G-Sync technology, which allows displays to have variable refresh rates and synchronize their refresh rates with the frame rates being output by GPUs. This means that no matter how many frames are being output by your GPU the screen will only refresh one time for each frame.

Even with G-sync, higher frame rates will still result in smoother motion and better controller response, but the stutter that normally results from uneven frame intervals will be essentially eliminated.
#1.1.11 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(26) | Disagree(5) | Report
ITPython  +   751d ago
As long as the PS4 continues to lead the pack, we shouldn't have to worry too much about devs optimizing games for the lowest common denominator (XB1) and then using that same version for the PS4.

So if PS4 is leading and we end up seeing this happen, it's likely due to MS paying some big bucks to keep the versions 'fair' between both consoles. It's probably going to happen, but I sure hope not.
R0ckPapaSiza   751d ago | Spam
n4gIzgay   751d ago | Spam
UltraNova  +   751d ago
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the PS4 version ended up at 30FPS after all this fiasco...

Seriously I expect anything these days.
#1.1.15 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report
ramiuk1  +   751d ago
they will soon,prob end of 2014 i expect folk to start saying things in that sense,its just with gen just starting they need to be civil.
All MS can do is throw money at devs imo but there is one major issue for sony and its advertising(I SEE NON)

MS is on youtube,sites,tv,magazines etc.
sony needs to start doing adverts on events like UFC,sports games round world etc
vikMage  +   751d ago
My greatest fear for next-gen is watered down games because of the lowest common denominator...
MicDude  +   751d ago
Your name is hilarious. I seriously use the "MikeLaurry" joke every time that movie comes on lol
KakashiHotake  +   750d ago
They would but Microsoft pays them not too.
GribbleGrunger  +   751d ago
That's not a response, he said that before we found out that the PS4 version was running at 60fps.
whoyouwit04  +   751d ago
You know the Ps4 version is running at 60 fps? Just wait and see bacause you want to believe the Ps4 version runs at 60 fps.
GribbleGrunger  +   751d ago
What are you talking about, whoyouwit04? I heard the dev say it twice on the Twitch stream. I doubt he's lying. Do you people actually follow the news or do you just read headlines here and there?
#1.2.2 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(41) | Disagree(2) | Report
MRMagoo123  +   751d ago
Once again another xbone fanboy saying "just wait and see" , we have done the waiting and seeing , the seeing has proven that every multiplat performs better on the ps4 , what are we meant to be waiting for now ?

As gribble said the dev said the ps4 version is 60fps its 100% confirmed as much as the ps4 being more powerful and selling faster is confirmed too.

Its time you xbone fanboys just accept the facts and move on with it, you will find life a lot easier that way, less stress, less anger and more fun.
Unspoken  +   750d ago
When he claims "see right here, its running at 60 fps", this could also mean at that particular moment, what the PS4 is currently rendering on screen is 60fps. It doesnt mean the entire game is running at 60fps. They even come back and say it dips below it.

PS4 fanboys telling others they don't know how to read, then interpret articles however they want, and after getting bent out of shape when someone disagrees with their claim, point the finger and say stop getting upset?

Look up the definition of hypocrisy.

These PS4 fanboys are hilarious.
GribbleGrunger  +   750d ago
So you think it probably just occasionally hits 60fps but dips below it 99% of the time? That wouldn't be 60fps then would it. It would be whatever it dips to 99% of the time. He clearly says it runs at a steady 60fps but there are times when it dips below it because of the amount of action on screen. It's 60fps on the PS4 and 30fps on the X1 ... Thems the facts.

You're a fine one to be judging the levels of hilarity.

"THERE!" shouts the dev
"What?" asks the interviewer.
"It hit 60fps and you missed it."
"Damn! Tell me when it happens again."
"Sure will," says the devs huddling closer to the TV
"So is this game 60fps?"
"Yes, on the PS4. It dips below that 99% of the time when things are rendered, but just occasionally it hits 60fps ... THERE!"
#1.2.5 (Edited 750d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Unspoken  +   749d ago
See, I told you these fanboys were funny!

Actually that was pretty funny...but no, that isn't what I meant. But based off what we're told: heavy areas means it will drop below 60. Do you know how often? No? Have you ever played the game to know how many areas are considered "heavy"? No? Then making a claim that you know exactly what the frame rates are going to be is speculative, which is typical of every fanboy in this thread.

When the opposite is said of the Xbox, you guys freak out, "it will go up to 45". Do you know how often it means? No? But according to your logic, it is going to sit at 30fps 99% of the game. Speculation in favor of your preferred console. Thus the fanboy is born again.

Good guesses, but far from fact until someone actually tests it. And you further proved my point.

You guys really need to work on your critical thinking. Check out the scientific method before your emotions override your reasoning. Oh wait, we're talking to fanboys, doesn't matter what side you are on.
Arkardo  +   751d ago
It's funny how every Xbone fanboy tries desperately to disbelief, the Ps4 it's more powerful End of story, there's no Esram, no Cloud, not anything to do that defies physics and mathematics.

Love your console AS IT IS, EMBRACE IT for every exclusive game that you choose to play, i think that everyone in here are able to make a choice base on their tastes, don't regret!

BUT PLEASE! stop diminishing what its obvious, please...
vigilante_man  +   751d ago
Don't blame gamers blame MS. For months they have known the PS4 would be the more powerful but they kept the lies going on. Even after both were released they could not admit it.

I agree 100% with you. Embrace what you have and just enjoy the brilliance of next gen gaming.
xJumpManx  +   751d ago
It took years for the ps3 to show any sort of advantage. But every SOnymite talked about the power of the cell. So please STFU about what you find funny.
FlunkinMonkey  +   751d ago | Well said
@ xJumpManx

"It took years for the ps3 to show any sort of advantage"

Yup, and now it only took weeks to show the power of the PS4 to the XBone.

So salty, haha.
-Foxtrot  +   751d ago
Come on Square just be honest, if it can it's a selling point for one of the versions, use it.
MatrixxGT  +   751d ago
They want to sell as much copies as possible. Coming out and saying one version performs better on Y console would impact sales of X consoles version that still took manpower to create. This game did not make them back no where near what they wanted/thought and this is an attempt to shorten that loss, they want to sell each and every copy they can.
AngelicIceDiamond  +   751d ago
Mash potatos are good. But mashed potatos with something extra like gravy is even better.

Hence the PS4.
hellzsupernova  +   751d ago
If it cannot run the up Rez version at 60fps it surely won't run the true next gen tomb raider at 60fps

Mmmmm gravystation 4 indeed
GarrusVakarian  +   751d ago
But the true next gen Tomb Raider will be a dedicated game FOR next gen (and PC) specifically, not a "port" that's on 5 separate platforms simultaneously.....

You are either a jealous, bitter X1 fanboy or a PC elitist...if you are the latter, then surely you should be contempt in playing it at 1440p and @ why are you here? Low self esteem? Need to bash on consoles to make yourself feel better?

Tomb Raider, 1080p 60fps on PS4, it's all gravy.
#1.6.1 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(4) | Report
MRMagoo123  +   751d ago
you got that wrong lucas most pc elitists play all there games at 240fps on their 10k res monitors , its not like the average pc gamer has a pc that runs no way near as good as a ps4, they ALL have paid $4000 for a pc.
hellzsupernova  +   751d ago
Lol Lucas was in reply to me?
Aleithian  +   751d ago
Perfect response.

And to think about all those arguments/debates you were involved in a few days ago about the 60fps issue - whoever it was "refusing to get this at 30fps" blah blah. I guess this just renders the whole thing moot. 1080/60. Add ketchup and enjoy.
Sarcasm  +   751d ago
Tomb Raider: Gravy Edition on PS4.
kayoss  +   751d ago
PS4: Tomb Raider: the Definite Edition
XB1: Tomb Raider: The somewhere between Definite and Last gen edition.
Sarcasm  +   751d ago
isa_scout  +   751d ago
Hope I was supposed to read that in Homer Simpsons voice because I did...sad part is I read it aloud :)
1OddWorld  +   751d ago
Super funny. I read GravyStation 4 and about lost it.
Thanks Lukas_Japonicus for the laugh.
Bubbles for you sir.
Trollinsky   751d ago | Spam
ovnipc  +   751d ago
I own both consoles. And i think same thing will happen with thief so i pre order on ps4. Main reason i got the xone its cause of titanfall and All my gamerscore of x360. I got a ps3 yesterday ps plus its awesome. Bioshock and xcom free hell yea
Eonjay  +   751d ago
"framerate-gate" - Sigh...

And yes, PS4 version comes with gravy on the side.
azshorty2003  +   751d ago
On the side? They should've just installed a Gravy button to dispense at will! mmmm..... gravy...
MysticStrummer  +   750d ago
I like to think of the Share button as the Pass the Gravy button.
Agent_hitman  +   751d ago
Wow that's delicious. I want smash potatoes as well..
logan_izer10  +   751d ago
In other words, "Please still buy it on Xbox One"
JohnnyTower  +   751d ago
A solid 30fps is nicer than 60fps with frame drops. 30-24fps drop wouldn't be noticeable. A 60-45fps drop would be far more noticeable. I can appreciate what the author is saying.
I'm a pc gamer too so fps arguments on consoles are moot to me.
#4 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(73) | Report | Reply
logan_izer10  +   751d ago
How does that make any sense at all? That's like saying a constant speed of 30mph will get you places faster than 60mph with occasion dips to 45mph
Mikelarry  +   751d ago
you best not try to be making just wouldn't work here. if some can believe 30fps is better than 60fps some would even go as far as pull facts from thin air:)
#4.1.1 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(29) | Disagree(4) | Report
JohnnyTower  +   751d ago
You can notice a 20km drop more than a 5km an hour drop. That's the difference. No matter what the speed is.
H0RSE  +   751d ago
That analogy is inaccurate. Speed of a car directly impacts your travel time, one of the prime reason for driving, game framerate does not. 60mph in a car is going to get you from point A to point B faster, however game framerate is not going to get you from the start to finish of a game any faster, nor is it going to make you complete actions any more quickly.

The only way this analogy would be accurate, would be if higher framerates somehow increased how long a second is or slowed down time around the player, allowing them to accomplish more in less time, not simply adding frames to an existing second. Framerate makes existing gameplay more fluid, speed would increase the amount of actions you could perform in a given time. You are arguing 2 completely different concepts.

That being said, the concept of "which one is better, " having a steady, lower framerate, compared to an unstable higher framerate, comes down to preference, not fact. Only when you are speaking of a competitive atmosphere where split-second timing/reflexes is crucial to success, does the advantage of 60fps become more of a necessity than a luxury.
#4.1.3 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(7) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   751d ago

So when it goes up to 45fps on the Xbox One version before dropping back to 30fps, you'll cry then too?

Xbox One version isn't constant 30fps:
Heisenburger  +   751d ago
He's just saying that it would be a smoother ride, which is true. Going sixty mph, then suddenly slamming the breaks down to forty-five, then racing back up to sixty is not as "smooth".

I would prefer these developers lock the game to a rock solid sixty. This is a ps360 game. There is absolutely no excuse, aside from time and money, as to why this game shouldn't be sixty frames solid.

They obviously weren't given much time to port it.
FullmetalRoyale  +   751d ago
@Heisenburger Yeah that's true, I suppose. The basic point is correct. I just don't know which I would prefer. Regardless of which platform, they couldn't get their game to run optimally. That means I will not give them a dime. I'm done rewarding sub-par work. Used down the road. They get nothing.
starchild  +   751d ago
@ SilentNegotiator

Yes, if the Xb1 version does indeed have an uncapped framerate, but is lower on average than the PS4 version then, yes, it is worse. Does that make you happy?

I don't care about the Xb1. I don't own one and I don't plan to own one. But Johnny Tower is right, yet he gets massive disagrees from all the mindless fanboys that don't have a clue what they are talking about.

Uncapped, variable frame rates result in stutter, period. And that sucks. Both versions are crippled in my opinion. The only thing I hate as much as stutter is screen tearing.
Eonjay  +   751d ago
Both are unlocked. So this would be inaccurate. The Xbox version can hit 45, but usually hovers back towards 30. They say that PS4 version runs at 60 most of the time but may drop a few frames during 'certain situations'.

Crystal Dynamics says: "Looking here, this is the PS4 version running at 60fps, again at 1080p," he explained. "That's awesome for that to be able to showcase because when you get your hands on it you can feel it."

I don't think people will understand as long a YouTube is lock to 30FPS. There is a huge fluidity difference.
BallsEye  +   751d ago
Where did devs say xbox one runs at 30fps or 45 fps? You guys pulling facts out of your poopers again?
dumahim  +   751d ago
It's in the first link in the posted article.
Flo-con  +   751d ago
@BallsEye I could be wrong, but I think it's because our TVs work at 60Hz.
So it's better if you have a divisor of that.
MorePowerOfGreen  +   751d ago

He asked when did the devs confirm that the XB1 version is currently at 30FPS

I'm sure he's seen that blog spam.
Eonjay  +   751d ago

I think it is more accurate to say that they 'targeted' 30 FPS for Xbox One and 60 FPS for PS4. Because neither is locked, the hope is that neither will ever fall below 30 FPS. When Digital Foundry does their comparison in a few days we will have a better idea of what this means.

Here is their target Spec benchmark based on the PC build:

XBO ~ 55 FPS
PS4 ~ 70 FPS

Note that the Definitive build has graphical features not found in PC build so both PS4 and XBO should in theory perform worse than these targets.

Editd: you can see the comparison around the 2:28 mark. Also, because this is YouTube you wont really see the true representation. Sorry I don't have the raw file.
#4.2.5 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
morganfell  +   751d ago

You stated this above:

"Where did devs say xbox one runs at 30fps or 45 fps? You guys pulling facts out of your poopers again?"

And here, 5 hours before that post you stated this:

"It was confirmed both run at 30 fps."

Your comment was here:

So you see, according to your earlier remark you apparently already had a 30FPS source. Why are you asking for one now? Were you pulling that earlier remark out of YOUR pooper?

And the 60 fps for the PS4 has been confirmed by producer Scot Amos.

Here is what you want to ignore:

Notice his name is in red rather than blue like other posters. Do you have even the slightest idea what that signifies?
#4.2.6 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(1) | Report
BallsEye  +   750d ago


"Amos did not comment on the performance of the Xbox One version."

Devs never said that xbox one runs at 30 fps or so. The stuff you are reffering to is from some no name blog and no source just a "top secret unknown insider quote".
WorldGamer  +   751d ago
@ JohnnyTower

Wow man, that sure didn't take long. I think you are really picking and choosing what to focus on.

I believe your point is irrelevant to the larger issue of a game, that is arguably last gen in nature is able to run at almost twice the frame rate on the PS4.

Design or aesthetic preferences aside, I think even you can appreciate the implications that this revelation has on debate of PS4 vs. X1.

Brush it aside all you want and focus on what is convenient, the truth is staring you square in your face sir and/or ma'am.


Ah, folks beat me to the punch. Guess I wasn't the only one dismayed by the apparent lack of sense demonstrated in the post above. Disturbing indeed.
#4.3 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
The_Infected  +   751d ago

"A solid 30fps is nicer than 60fps with frame drops."

Keep telling yourself that. The PS4 version is much better plain and simple.
PersonMan  +   751d ago

Consistency makes a difference.

If it's 60fps 100% of the time, it's nice, but if it bounces around, it results in judder and that's ugly.

I can take 30fps or 60fps, but anything in between sucks.
Shakengandulf  +   751d ago
I have to disagree with ya this time, i'd much prefer a constant frame rate.. killzone SF should have had maintained 30fps, the others did and they were fine.
But shadowfall was a mess in terms of framerate always up and down and was very noticable.

As long as tomb raider maintains 60fps 99% im fine with that, but considering its unlocked, my guess is it aint.
Either way, i'll be buying tombraider regardless.
PersonMan  +   751d ago
JohnnyTower: I actually agree with you on this. 30 divides evenly into 60 which will mean that you have a steady framerate. However, 45 doesn't divide evenly into 60, so you'll see some unique frames, and some duplicate frames resulting in tiny pauses (or judder/stutter) that would've been smooth as silk at a solid 30fps.

logan: You can't compare frame rate to the speed of a vehicle.

The frames have to sync up with the refresh rate of your display or else you'll see noticeable stuttering.

15, 20, 30 and 60 all divide evenly into 60Hz so if the game runs at a constant of any of those frame rates, you will get no judder. Anything else will cause inconsistencies in the frame rate and you'll see micro pauses.
#4.5 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(17) | Report | Reply
for we are many  +   751d ago
LOL @ disagrees, PersonMan said the truth. Frame rate has to be evenly divisible on 60(almost all TVs have refresh rate of 60Hz) for the frames to SYNC with TV's refresh rate. Frame rate should also remain constant in order to avoid judder/stuttering. So STABLE 30 fps is preferable to 60 fps with wide SWINGS.
ShwankyShpanky  +   751d ago
The Xbox version is unlocked as well. So are you going to say that 30fps with swings is better than 60fps with swings as well?
PersonMan  +   751d ago
ShwankyShpanky: I never said either of them were good. I would rather see a stable 30fps or 60fps. Anything in between is bad.

I can't say I like either of them. I guess if I had to choose (and had both consoles), I'd choose the PS4 version because from the sounds of it, the frame rate is more consistent in the 60fps range whereas the XBox One version runs at 30-45 range.
MasterCornholio  +   751d ago
What if tomb raider on the Xbox One runs like Ryse?

What I mean by that is an average framerate of 24FPS with dips to 16FPS.

If Tomb Raider is running at 60FPS on the PS4 its because Sonys console is capable of running the game at 1080P at 60FPS. There's no need to downgrade it just because the Xbox One can't handle it on the same level as the PS4.
cbuc1125  +   751d ago
@JohnnyTower..."I'm a pc gamer too so fps arguments on consoles are moot to me." So why are you here bothering to comment?
#4.7 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
GribbleGrunger  +   751d ago
There's some great one liners on Gaf too.
HiddenMission  +   751d ago

You fail hard it's clear your an MS supporter. Anyone who has ever played a video game knows that dropping from 60fps to say 45fps is usually very short and is so quick you hardly notice it but a drop from 30fps to say 22fps is very clear.

Stop trying to spin this like the XB1's closer to 30fps is now all of a sudden better than closer to 60fps.

Fail hard 2 bubbs...
popup  +   751d ago
Looks like GTX Titan PC owners get an experience like that too though if this video is anything to go by. 48-75 FPS @1080p although it is the older version of TR.
#4.10 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
tee_bag242  +   750d ago
Lol nice try. He's doing all that while recording that video to Fraps at the same time.
Ashby_JC  +   751d ago
I currently only have a XB1 and down the road I will get a PS4 but your comment is why the folks on this site laugh at XB1 owners.

I will enjoy my console no doubt and hearing that one version may run better is dissapointing.

I wont sit here and make excuses. So I would suggest you do the same.
NeoTribe  +   751d ago
You sir truly are the master of delusion. You heard it here folks, 30 fps is better than 60 fps... Only an xbot could spew something so false.
WickedLester  +   751d ago
More gravy please!! Everything tastes better with gravy!
izumo_lee  +   751d ago
Why is all this such a big deal? Last gen the PS3 got the short end of the stick for many multiplatform games, & yes the Playstation fans were upset but they dealt with it. Even with the constant articles from Digital Foundary & Lens of Truth (where are they now?) making it well known that the 360 versions of games were better.

Now that the role has reversed there shouldn't be any 'whining' from Xbox owners about it, like the saying goes 'what goes around, comes around'. So just like PS3 fans just deal with it & be happy you got the game in the first place.
Death  +   751d ago
Yeah, PS3 fans dealt with it last gen. They have been waiting for payback and now they are going crazy with it. The big differance was last gen they were telling 360 owners the PS3 was going to dominate/destroy/obliterate the 360 before it's release. When the system shipped and the games were "inferior" it made for some interesting debates.

Fast forward 8 years and they are dusting off the domination flag and marching towards the Xbox Ones utter demise. The irony is PS3 fans witnessed game development on the PS3 get better over time as developers got more familiar with the PS3's more complex architecture. The Xbox One launched with a more complex ram solution that will take more time to get used to and use efficiently. How do so many forget so fast?
izumo_lee  +   751d ago
I think the problem with your theory that it will take time for devs to understand the One's architecture is that they for the most part have the same specs as the PS4. The PS4 though was designed to be a gaming machine the One not as much. Microsoft designed the One to cater to their needs first with Kinect & their OS that is the problem. All the parts in the PS4 & One are PC's just that the PS4 is designed that much better. So it may turn out that the One will always be that much less that the PS4, & may never be equal at all.

With the PS3 developers were dealing with a brand new piece of tech that many really didn't know what to make out of the Cell. Sony's 1st party got a grasp of it more quickly while 3rd party struggled immensely for years.
vigilante_man  +   751d ago
PS3 games got better and better as developers got to grips with it and also because the cell had some neat features once mastered.

Sony also invested in their studios - not shut them down. So even though PS3 owners had to put up with inferior multi-platforms they did get the superior exclusives.

But fuss was always made in the media and by 360 owners about better looking mult-platform games. The gap now is much bigger in terms of graphical power between the XB1 and PS4.

PS4 versions will look better. PS4 exclusives will look better. But it all boils down to great games, stories and gameplay. No reason all new consoles cannot enjoy the benefit of great next gen games.

The eSRAM of XB1 will never match the raw power of the PS4. Both will get better with more optimisation.
Death  +   751d ago
The "Cell" was the marketing term for the modified PowerPC chip the PS3 used. The Xbox 360 was also PowerPC based, but with less cores and more traditional PowerPC based architecture. They were much more similar than many believe. The big differance was the GPU. Sony initially wanted a second Cell to act as a GPU. That was scraped in favor of a dedicated GPU late in development.

Both the Xbox One and PS4 are based on the same tablet APU tech developed by AMD. The differance is in the ram setup each manufacturer choose. Sony went with a simple solution when they opted for the GDDR5 that is very GPU driven. The PS4 is geared 100% towards games with a minimal OS and less scalability for new features as time goes on. It's not as limited as the PS3 was, but not as flexible over time.

Microsoft decided to go with DDR3 to give the console more "balance". The OS is much more adaptable over time, but the downside is it has less GPU performance out of the box. The solution for this weaker GPU performace was the inclusion of the much more complex eSram. No one is claiming the eSram will make up the differance that going with GDDR5 would have made, but it will increase GPU performance with time as developers get a better handle on the best way to use it.

Both consoles will get better over time. History shows us that the more complex architecture shows more improvement in a given time frame. Sony designed the PS, PS2 and PS3 around this process.
HiddenMission  +   751d ago

You really do talk out of your ass bro. No one but Sony engineers know how scaleble the OS for the PS4 is. Hell look at the PS3 OS at launch to now radically different.

You are trying to twist facts and history to promote your claims that MS's console will see large improvements over time.

Fact is wrong look at launch titles and now the second set of installment games are starting to come in and guess what the gap is not decreasing or even staying the same it's widening.

Before it was just resolution and now it's FPS. What's next all the bells in whistles.

Keep trying to spin your pro MS will get there one day speech.
Death  +   751d ago
It's not rocket science. Graphics Dual Data Rate Ram is made for graphics. Sony has never been big on OS features. The PS3's hardware limitations are what kept features as simple as party chat off the system. If they focused on graphics power with the system, something has to give.

Microsoft is running three different OS's on the Xbox One. They have the W8 interface we see, the OS for developing games and a third OS that transitions between the two. They also focused on CPU stability with DDR3.

You can't honestly believe the PS4 has better GPU performance and better CPU capability, can you? Both systems have limited resources. Neither can have it all.

It's been 60 days. How many years did it take for Sony's third party games to catch up? You really seem to have a short memory.

As for your reply below, spending cash to raise awareness for your product is called marketing. A bribe would be throwing a party and giving hundred or thousands of dollars of product to someone that reviews your product. You can't pick and choose what is ethical and what is not. Sony's event was as shady as it gets if you are playing the bribery card. Both companies do it, how is it you only see one of them and ignore the other?
#6.1.5 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(7) | Report
HiddenMission  +   751d ago

Do you even know what bribery is here goes two examples.

1) Something, such as money or a favor, offered or given to a person in a position of trust to influence that person's views or conduct.

2)Something serving to influence or persuade.

Now let's try Advertising.

1)The activity of attracting public attention to a product or business, as by paid announcements in the print, broadcast, or electronic media.

2)The promotion of goods or services for sale through impersonal media, such as radio or television.

You can't see the difference because you choose to not see the difference because you are a fanboy. MS paid youtubers and said you can't talk about the fact that we paid you to say nice things that's called a bribe considering it's illegal by FCC standards.

What isn't illegal is when you tell the viewer that your opinion is being funded by the maker of the product you're reviewing.

Also you talk gap between PS3 and 360 well just so you know that had more to do with rare set up than retarded set up. The PS3 had rare architecture compared to the easy to develop for 360.

With the PS4 versus XB1 it's pretty much the same components but designed for 2 different purposes ones for gaming which we will see the results get better and better over time while the other is more for OS as you said. While it will improve it will be much slower because the hardware was not design focused on large improvements in the gaming's just that simple so get over it bro.
Death  +   751d ago
Microsoft partnered with Machinima. Machinima sent out the emails with their rules/stipulations. Here's a copy of the email.

All you needed to participate was the tag and 30 seconds of gameplay footage. A 60 second spot that begins "This is Forza on the Xbox One" with 30 seconds of in game footage that was 60 seconds long qualified. You didn't need to review it or the system. You didn't need to say you liked it. The only thing you couldn't do is say it sucked. Makes sense since it was an awareness campaign and not an unbiased review campaign. If you decided to make a review or an endorcement, by FTC regulations you would need to disclose you were being paid.

The cap for this promotion was $3,750 dollars and then it ended.

Please send me a link where gaming journalists disclaim they were paid by Sony to review their products. If they received gifts in the form of consoles and games, that is payment. Walking away with close to $1000 per person in merchandise from the event sounds like a bribe to me. You see $3 for product awareness as a bribe, but not free PS4's? I'm the fanboy blinded by console lust?

The relatively simple Xbox 360 got better with time.

The more complex PS3 got better with time. It got much better since there was a learning curve associated with development.

The Xbox One will show more improvement than the PS4, but the PS4 will most likely remain superior since it has better specs. They gap will decrease over time, but the PS4 will retain the upper hand. This should not be that difficult to understand. The Xbox One launched with a handicap that the PS4 doesn't have. This means devs were able to get up and running quicker with the PS4.
ShwankyShpanky  +   751d ago
To be fair, 360 versions were never running at full on double the resolution or framerate of PS3 versions. It's gotta be a bitter pill to swallow.
Ashby_JC  +   751d ago

I agree.

I feel that no matter the GEN it seems we will never get 2 systems that have the same power/specs or whatever.

So as an xbox one owner I welcome them to make a game optmized to that consoles strength. If they can get 60FPS on the PS4 and 30FPS on the XB1....then so be it.

I dont want them to make games lesser because one of the two cant handle it. So maybe with TOMB Raider running at a higer FPS might be the start of DEVS not making games 100% equal.

I will eventually pick up a PS4 and want the best that system can do. And at the same time I want the best that the XB1 can do.

Look forward to playing all the NEW IPS this gen!!!
boeso  +   751d ago
You can never have too much gravy.
supraking951  +   751d ago
poor M$, nothing seems to go there way. Wins Decemeber monthly sales but still 1.2 million behind PS4....Gets caught paying Youtubers to sell the console...framerate gate being an issue after launch...well played Sony :)
Death  +   751d ago
Ignorance seems to be Sony's best friend. The huge scheme to sell consoles on Youtube was an awareness campaign to showcase games on the Xbox One. Not reviews like many are claiming. They spent just under $4000 on it. They didn't get "caught" doing anything. Sony gave reviewers consoles, games and accessories in New York at their pre-release party. That to me is much more troubling than $3 for youtube hits to raise awareness for the console.

If you want to level the playing field, start by requesting reviewers and various media outlets return all the gifts they receive from all the manufacturers. Then we can concentrate on keeping the little guys unbiased by stopping their revenue flow on the various youtube channels.
HiddenMission  +   751d ago
Actually Death a list was put forward of the youtubers who took the bribe and reviews were in the list.

And before you say it wasn't a bribe well whenever someone gives you money and says don't talk about us or the money it's called a bribe. Sponsors would say make sure that at some point in your video you let viewers know the content was sponsored by us.

You seem to be spinning and swinging for the fences right now but hitting nothing just chill and go play a game.
Edi007  +   751d ago
Xbone-fan talk to mush to justifies there 500 € the PS4 is the most powerful . THE END
hollabox  +   751d ago
I don't really care about 720P VS 1080P, I prefer smoother framerates, I like to stay at 60 FPS or higher (120hz monitor). Please don't tell me I can't tell the difference, most people who game on a 120hz monitor and move down to 60 can pick up the difference within a minute. 30hz or lower makes the controls feel heavy if the software or hardware can't compensate.
#10 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
GeraltofRivia   751d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(2)
KillerPwned  +   751d ago
What if someone doesn't like Gravy though?
#12 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Oschino1907  +   751d ago
Bacon and or cheese. If you don't like any of those then may some higher power help guide you through life...
KillerPwned  +   751d ago
Mmm I have to take Bacon and Cheese over Gravy honestly
EXVirtual  +   751d ago
For a lot of games, yes, it is just gravy. It's mandatory in FPS', fighting games and racers, for me at least.
That's not to say that 60fps is a bad thing. I'm glad Tomb Raider runs at 60fps on the PS4 and I enjoy 60fps.
And to Xbox fans, no. The game is not bad because it's 30fps on the XBO. But the point is, the PS4 is clearly more powerful. End of discussion.
#13 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
LAWSON72  +   751d ago
IMO any fast paced game should be 60 fps and + that is gravy. Any slower pased game (not Tomb Raider) 30 fps is fine and + that is gravy.
rafaman  +   751d ago
There you have it, fanboys.

just more FUD from sony
vigilante_man  +   751d ago
But FUD tastes so much better with... Gravy!
rafaman  +   751d ago

MasterCornholio  +   751d ago
FUD that brought us 60FPS in Tomb Raider for PS4.

Actually that FUD sounds pretty good to me.

BattleTorn  +   751d ago

I never saw anyone claiming Tomb Raider on X1 would be unplayable, or anything...

But provided you have the choice, why buy on X1 over PS4?
Mkai28  +   751d ago
Maybe because the PS4 version(60fps) is $60. And the XB1 version( 30fps) is $30.:) serously though, the only upgrade on the x1 it seems is better textures and higher res..:(
jacksjus  +   751d ago
Look if both systems ran equally they would just say it. MS is putting the gag on all developers to save face and I don't blame them for this. Sony suffered the same fate the last gen and I don't recall this many articles calling that fact out back then.
ShinnokDrako  +   751d ago
I understand them, they have to defend the weaker console to sell the game on it too. And to avoid the wrath of M$...
WikusVanDeMerwe   751d ago | Immature | show | Replies(1)
cell989  +   751d ago
Its not CD fault they couldnt meet 60FPS on XBONE, thats MS ball for not upgrading their drivers correctly and offering a gimped console that competes more directly with the WIIU
DoesUs  +   751d ago
Some terrific spin in here from XB1 owners!
static360  +   751d ago
i really don't see why dev need to make a statement for X1 running some games at 30fps, its not their fault.
BABY-JEDI  +   751d ago
I'm really amazed Tomb Raider is running @ 60fp on the PS4. I'm even more amazed that it's running @ 30fps on the XBox1. I guess I'm easily amazed
; )
SpideySpeakz  +   751d ago
The Xboners are really taking this hard. I'd be too, if I spent a $100 more on a lower quality product.
GamersHeaven  +   751d ago
Xbone is more on par with Wii U's hardware it seems.
Hercules189  +   751d ago
Yep Ryse and Quantum Break both look like last gen games compared to anything on the PS4 that is also a time machine and can get you any type of prostitute you want for free. I've seen the BF4 comparisons and I'll tell you that if you show the two versions side by side with out telling them which is the PS4 or X1 version to an average gamer that actually plays games, they will not be able to tell you which is which.
#24.1 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
RealtorMDandDC  +   751d ago
@AliTheSnake1 ....You say Contrast is at 60fps
And the frame-rate constantly drops.. That is not true. I've played it tons, I never noticed any hiccups in the game.

Check my PSN ID: ProPaperPusher
aquamala  +   751d ago
so the same people that were saying 30 fps was good enough and downplaying the 60 fps PC version... suddenly 60 fps is important
Hicken  +   751d ago
Who downplayed the PC version? Could you, perhaps, be referring to people who said, "who cares about the PC version?" because PC is generally irrelevant in a debate about consoles? Nobody is saying 30fps is bad; they're saying 60fps is better. They're saying that the difference in framerate between the two consoles is indicative of the power disparity between them that some are still arguing is minor or doesn't exist at all.

Even Microsoft said there wouldn't be that much of a gap, but it's evident their focus on things other than gaming has cost the XB1 in terms of gaming capability as it compares to its biggest competitor.

In that capacity, 60fps is important. Not that it ever wasn't; people just didn't mind if it wasn't there.
Banok  +   751d ago
If you REALLY like gravy then buy a gaming PC ;)

Altho 60fps is ok for a singleplayer game.
#27 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
spoonard  +   751d ago
Can we STOP with the addition of GATE to the end of everything that might be controversial? The Watergate scandal was called that because the name of the hotel it took place in was the Watergate Hotel, not because there was some water scandal so it was called Watergate. Adding gate onto the and of a word doesn't even make sense. STOP!
Dirkster_Dude  +   751d ago
Well at least the argument is as stupid as the name.
Jack_Reacher  +   750d ago
Your right. Gravy gate sounds stupid. After all the gravy would just run between the bars in the gate.

I think the real question would be would the gravy run at 60fps on the ps4 and only 30 on the xbone?
Dirkster_Dude  +   751d ago
What I find fortunate is I don't care about the frame rate because I wouldn't notice unless it was below 30 frames per second anyway. I already played and completed the 360 version and it didn't matter to me then either. People need to like the game for what it is and it is doubtful 60fps vs. 30fps makes that much of a difference for this game. Maybe for a game like Call of Duty it makes a difference, but I never noticed that I cared when I actually played those games. It is not the Panacea everyone makes it out to be. Makes a great checkmark in the stat column otherwise who cares? And if you do - I don't. The only people I find that truly care seem to be people that are usually insecure about a purchase for some reason and need to justify why they picked a particular platform and/or game and it just has to be better than everything else.
#29 (Edited 751d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
JohnS1313  +   751d ago
I hope these third party developers don't start dumbing down the PS4 versions just to stop the crying.
Hercules189  +   750d ago
Who's worrying. I see more sonytards trying to cling onto something that makes barely little difference more than Xbox fans worrying. Just so do you think the majority of gamers that actually play games visit sites like these to find out which version of a game is barely better.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Gameplay impressions with Black Forest Games Rogue Stormers

3h ago - Keith writes: First and foremost, I want to thank the PR firm that gave me access to Black Forest... | Rogue Stormers

Marvel Heroes 2016 War Machine Review | MMO-Play

9h ago - One of the newest additions to Marvel Heroes is War Machine. Col James Rhodes, Tony stark's best... | PC

Guess N4G Game of the Year Winners, win a $300 Amazon Gift Card

Now - Also enter for a chance to win a gift card for writing a user blog, writing a user review, or being a top contributor for the month. | Promoted post

The Infinite Possibilities of Albion Online | Hardcore Gamer

9h ago - People play a lot of Hearthstone; it’s a great game that’s easy to learn and hard to master, but... | PC

Popzara Podcast E.124 Steve Kamb Talks Nerd Fitness + Leveling Up Your Life

9h ago - The late, great Rodney Dangerfield once said that he and his wife went together like water and di... | Steve Kamb

Elite: Dangerous – Horizons (Steam) Review on Popzara Press

9h ago - Takes the original space trucking theme and makes it better; an important series that space fans... | Elite: Dangerous