"While we often debate about the power differences between both the Xbox One and PS4, there's still so much we don't know about either console."
Until naughty dog tells me this mean nothing
Naughty Dog doesn't work with XO, only PS. Not sure what you mean.
Why wait for Naughty Dog? People should look closely at Ubi with Watchdogs.
Next-Gen graphics doesn't start until Naughty Doge says it does-so!
In other words he means Crytec only did work exclusive on XBO and nothing on PS4, so ND only work on PS and not having this problem as of now.
wen every 3rd party engine performing better on PS4 this just means CryEngine is poor.
What a poorly written article... par for the course from gamingdolt. This line alone is laughable at best: "Neither console is perfect and having released just six months ago, it’s still any one’s ball game when it comes to which platform is suited to 1080p/60 FPS." Let's try the one that has been able to consistently hit it on more titles? They then go on to fabricate framerate issues as if it is something that plagues all PS4 1080p60 games... Just click bait peppered with lies.
@fr0sty, not only do I admire your name, I wholeheartedly agree with your opinion of FailingDolt. I keep praying that N4G will ban this site. Their occasional semi-professional article doesn't makeup for their hundreds of idiotic ones in between. It's as if they have one "real" writer/journalist, surrounded by a bunch of 12 year old contributors. The line regarding 1080p/60fps that you mention is a great example of the noobish extent of their knowledge. The PS3 could do 1080p/60fps for crying out loud (see: Wipeout HD)...it depends on many variables. I'm so tired of people acting like resolution and framerate are the only two aspects of graphics.
Look like the only difference will be resolution. And, it worth noting that this probably has more to do with memory than GPU.
@Nykamari Crytek have done extensive work on the PS4. They haven't released a game for it (yet), but they built a game engine for it. You don't get much more experienced than that. "Similar results" is a very loose term though.
Crytek hasn't shown anything for the PS4 so till then this is bull. Nothing on the PS4 uses Crytek right now. Pics or it didn't happen.
Weird how Infamous Second Son is 1080p 50fps, and how Tomb Raider is also 60fps on PS4 (with some drops).
When it comes to tech and graphics Crytek are usually ahead of the game, and seeing how the PS4 and XBO are basically specialized gaming Laptops, Crytek should know a good deal more than most developers about maximizing hardware, outside of maybe first parties. That being said had Ryse been on PS4 it would have been 1080p @ 30fps locked.
"That being said had Ryse been on PS4 it would have been 1080p @ 30fps locked.' Probably
"the PS4 and XBO are basically specialized gaming Laptops" No.
@Frosty Would you care to elaborate, because technologically speaking, gaming laptops are the closest things the PS4 and XBO are comparable to at the high end in performance, size, and build.
I love how my specialized gaming laptop does so much more than any comparable PC by far and will only have IMPROVED visuals as time progresses unlike any other static video card or gaming rig, minus the occasional performance update or something extreme like mantle or whatever. Specialized gaming laptop fo lyfe yo!
Gaming laptops don't have 8 cores Gaming laptops don't have 8 GB GDDR5 Gaming laptops don't (usually) run a 1.84TF GPU So, no, it's not a gaming laptop.
@ frosty / cyclindk / ju It amazes me, how people who have no intelligence on a subject, decide to comment out of pure ignorance, hoping to prove a point. @frosty My point still stands. @cyclindk You could have saved yourself so embarrassment, if you educated yourself before speaking. A console will never do more than a PC or anything comparable, until they become completely open source. A console is nothing more than a closed PC whose owners dictate what is allowed on their PC. And if you knew what you were talking about, you would see that my comment wasn't offensive at all, and that I've done nothing, but praise the PS4's hardware (XBO is solid, but it has some silly design choices). Only someone technologically ignorant would think comparing the consoles to a high-end laptops (although XBO is more mid-high) would be an insult........... @Ju Which brings me to the most ignorant one of all. Gaming laptops don't have 8 cores Gaming laptops don't have 8 GB GDDR5 Gaming laptops don't (usually) run a 1.84TF GPU The amount of stupidity and cluelessness in this comment is just so sad. A quick Google search and you would have saved yourself the embarrassment. High-End Gaming Laptops have hyper-threaded i7 CPUs, which mean 8 cores are in gaming laptops. The GTX 880m comes in a 4GB GDDR5 / 8GB GDDR5 versions, with 4GB becoming the new standard for gaming laptops. High-End gaming laptops (OFTEN) run above 1.84 GFLOPS. The 7950m is 1.8 TFLOPS, the 7970m is 2.2 TFLOPS, the R9 m290x is 2.2 TFLOPS, the 8970m is 2.2 TFLOPS, the 780m is 2.4 TFLOPS, the 870m is 2.5 TFLOPS, and the 880m is 2.9 TFLOPS. So again you don't know what you're talking about.
You could easily spot PS fanboys these days. The denial and bs always give them away. Abizzel1 destroyed them with that post and I doubt they will face facts. Making it seem like these consoles are technical benchmark will only make you feel disappointed in the end. Did you hear about watchdogs. All the next gen consoles are great. You buy the for the game and because you know eventually you know support for them is going to stop. Stop acting like they are doing something new.
Trust me, ps4 owners aren't missing out.
30fps greatness awaits for console owners for the future. Think about it if games are going to get vastly more demanding and games like battlefield 4 had to be cut down to 900p and 720p just to get 60fps then either more resolution cuts have to be made or big graphical shortcuts.
Man you are on point, i intensely say this all the time, bf4 is the most graphically demanding game on current consoles, had to be cut down, bf4 is doing things games are not doing.
@Naruto Agreed, man Naughty Dogs always sets the standards of graphical performance.
Crytek is an overrated developer. Every single one of their console releases do not perform optimally yet they are still regarded as the "technical" king. I'm sorry, if your game had to run below the "standard" resolution and still perform poorly than most games, you don't get have a pedestal of legitimacy in you. There is a reason why there is hardly any praise for them while the opposite goes to devs like ND or R*.
Haha naughty dog dont have anything on crytek kid
Not sure how this comment got so many agrees. But this is n4g after all. Crytek is known for its graphics tech on xb1 PC and ps4. If anyone would know. It would be them
I'm pretty sure Naughty dog is capable, but they only work for one platform. While Crytek works with every console and PC.
CryEngine has nothing to do with naughty dog, it was created by crytek. i think they know what their product is capable of.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but ND are not the best visual company in this industry. Crytek are light years ahead of ND when it comes to graphic feats.
I have played a few crytek games and a few naughty dog games.... that might be true on pc if you spend as much as I would if I bought 3 ps4s but on consoles naughty dog is currently king. If you do not think so then you have not played uncharted or the last of us. Last of us is the most beautiful game last gen.
@nowitzki2004 I played TLOU and I love that game but it is in no league of what Crysis 3 was pushing on consoles. ND make nice looking games but also remember there linier, meaning you can push more in those style games. Crysis 3 was a FPS with big worlds etc and still looked better and it was also an older game. Halo 4 to me even looked better then TLOU last gen, not trying to be bias but look up some pics of both games and compare with your own eyes. Not downgrading ND because they are a great company but there not the best when it comes to Visuals. They make great looking games but if you want to see the best looking games then Crytek/Epic are the ones to follow.
Doesnt crytek favor ms over sony? I believe so, so this is meaningless coming from them.
They don't actually say 'the results are the same' they say they are similar, which doesn't mean the same as 'the same'. There must be differnces but the don't want to say obviously.
on the news they also say something like "a plane similar to this one pictured" when a plane goes missing and similar in that case means the exact make and model. they just say similar because its not the plane thats missing. i think its a "similar" point here. except the ps4 is the plane pictured. ;)
Someone pass The Cell some tissues. I think he is close..... Naughty Dog > God
Only tears I have are joy, naughty dog proved them self way too many times sorry to say. They pushed ps3 beyond what we expected
I wasn't referring to tears ;0)
Yet many devs have yielded incredible graphics and 1080p @ 60fps with the ps4. I have never considered Crytek to be proper game developers, as they only have few games but a vast number of tech demo's under their belt.
Funny thing they dont even make most their money from the game industry. But from licensing out the cryengine to the military/architecture firms and many more. Most of their studios still haven't launched a game including Free Radical(Crytek UK) http://www.vg247.com/2011/0...
Wow I had no idea about the military thing; thats insane.
There is not one game on the PS4 with incredible graphics... with good graphics, yes we have seen good looking games on the PS4, but with incredible graphics, no we haven't seen it on the PS4, neither on the X1.
Maybe you should say "no I haven't seen" instead of we. Obviously that is your problem, not "ours".
Yea sure thing Crytek, i'm confident Ryse would run 900p with the same frame rate drops to the teens on the ps4 /s
i dont mind that at all actually. there are some games where 30fps will get the job done and some where 60fps is a necessity. we just have to trust that the devz know whats best for their game and get it right.
60 fps should be a standard at this point. when are these developers going to get it through their thick skulls that gamers want a high framerate, more than a few extra effects and polish. all those enhanced visuals dont do us any good when they are shrouded in motion blur the whole time. playing through alot of the HD collections, like god of war origins, really demonstrates how a 60fps framerate can make even PS2 era games look good.
Buy a decent pc. 60fps and 1080p would be more common. Steam would get you great deals on games too. The option is out there, go for it.
I never listen to what Crytek say out their mouth. I never liked their games either.
I didn't mind the original Crysis, but after that... eh.
Crytek give us Ryse 2.
They will give you Ryse 2 with the help of God of War devs working on it. You know the ones that got fired from Sony SCE. They got hired to work on Ryse 2.
Hmmm.... given that Crytek has not developed a game on the PS4 yet and that there is a clear difference in real world performance since the release of the PS4 and X1, I find the conclusions in this article hard to believe. Although the language used, "similar results" is open to interpretation. Looking at the disparity in multi-platform games so far between PS4 and X1 games, I think Crytek is trying to ensure they don't offend anyone. That is their right, but plain observation so far refutes their claim. Time will tell in the end.
Considering how much they are in Microsoft's pocket it's easy to draw the conclusion that they are trying to downplay the differences between the PS4 and the One.. Ryse looked great on the One but with an "on rails" experience and repetitive nature it was clear that content was sacrificed in order to achieve those visuals. Then again Crytek isn't know for great games rather great looking games..
Uhhh......who wrote this?
When a first party studio claims the same, then I will listen. A studio which primarily lends its services to pretty PC builds is almost meaningless when discussing the finer points of closed system consoles.
At same rez. A PS4 version of RYSE would be 60fps
No it wouldn't. Doubling the framerate would require twice as much hardware performance. The PS4 is not twice as powerful as the XB1.
You got disagree for a console that has a mobile CPU you in it. Wow these people think the PS4 is some kind of God send.
At the least, the framerate would be more stable. It's also highly likely that the game would be in 1080p. ..though, with that said, wouldn't the rendering difference be nearly the same? What's the difference in pixels displayed at 1080p versus 900p? Isn't that something like twice as much? If so, then isn't it possible that the PS4 could run Ryse at 60fps at the same resolution? Seems likely.
That site should not be allowed to write gaming 'news' if you would call it that.
I don't mind 30fps. 60fps is just a plus.
He's right. As they try to fit more and more detail to the games, they're always going to want the maximum render time so they will always choose to aim for 30fps. However, the people who want to push faster frames can always play on PC where they can decide for themselves what's more important to them. Graphics or framerate. I've said this a hundred times, you'll ALWAYS have better graphics at a LOWER frame rate. If the developers want 60, their graphics are going to fall behind the competition.
sure, you can stay at 30 while everyone else reach to 60. fine~