Isn't all of this performance and power difference mainly up to the developer??

#11Rixgear(Topic Creator)Posted 2/19/2014 12:53:23 PM
Reflex-Arc posted...
To a point, yes, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone. We're going to see some great looking Xbox One games during its lifecycle, but there is simply no denying that the PS4 is just a more capable machine.

That being said, we all knew this going into the generation. MS was pretty up front about the fact that they were not aiming for the utmost in graphical capabilities from the get go and instead aiming for a platform that performed well for the rest of the machine's intended usage.


I completely agree. I am not at all denying the ps4 is more powerful. I am simply saying a lot can be done on the developer side of things if done right.
---
Proud owner of all consoles. Nintendo ID- Ragebit, Steam- Rixgear
PSN- OneLibra, Gamertag- Ragebit, 3DSFC- 2793-0608-4349
#12SigmaLongshotPosted 2/19/2014 12:58:57 PM
Rixgear posted...
Viet0ne posted...
No generation has had two systems launch at the same time with this significant difference of hardware performance.

The PS3 and 360 summation of performance were not significantly different. The combined performance of the Cell and RSX provided better performance than the Xenos in the 360 by itself. That's why developers eventually brought games to parity and exclusives were slightly better. The GPU in the 360 was also 50% more powerful in majority of GPU functions in comparison to the RSX alone, hence why multiplats performed better on the 360.

The Xbox One has no additional hardware to make up the difference to be optimized like the PS3 did.

Anyone who believes developers can get the same performance out of the Xbox One that the PS4 can provide is ignorant and delusional. If hardware wasn't a ceiling, then why can't developers simply optimize for the PS3 and 360 even further to get the same performance as the Xbox One and PS4.

Hardware has limitations. Optimizations allow you to use the performance as close to the limitations as possible. You can't simply optimize and go beyond the capabilities of the hardware.


So now I am completely delusional and ignorant?? :( wow ok.. that us pretty mean. I was just offering what I thought. It isnt like I make these consoles. The power gap is there yes. But looking at the best looking games each console offers shows they are very comparable. That is what I am saying. There are more tricks and things a developer can use to make the game "LOOK" the same even if it isnt within raw power. Again Witcher 2 looks amazing and that game is for high end PCs. Aren't people saying Ryse is one of the nest looking games on console now? It isnt that huge a gap. Genesis and SNES had a big gap too, yet those games also "LOOKED" the same.


I'm currently freaking WORKING on both of these platforms and the major discrepancy is that the Xbox One is far harder to optimise for. This is "cell processor/blast processing" propaganda at it's finest.

Case in point; Watch_Dogs. The codeheads got everything working very much equal on both XB1 and PS4, but we had a few hours of problems getting textures working right, but XB1 took longer to optimise movement.
---
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/
#13Rixgear(Topic Creator)Posted 2/19/2014 1:03:06 PM
SigmaLongshot posted...
Rixgear posted...
Viet0ne posted...
No generation has had two systems launch at the same time with this significant difference of hardware performance.

The PS3 and 360 summation of performance were not significantly different. The combined performance of the Cell and RSX provided better performance than the Xenos in the 360 by itself. That's why developers eventually brought games to parity and exclusives were slightly better. The GPU in the 360 was also 50% more powerful in majority of GPU functions in comparison to the RSX alone, hence why multiplats performed better on the 360.

The Xbox One has no additional hardware to make up the difference to be optimized like the PS3 did.

Anyone who believes developers can get the same performance out of the Xbox One that the PS4 can provide is ignorant and delusional. If hardware wasn't a ceiling, then why can't developers simply optimize for the PS3 and 360 even further to get the same performance as the Xbox One and PS4.

Hardware has limitations. Optimizations allow you to use the performance as close to the limitations as possible. You can't simply optimize and go beyond the capabilities of the hardware.


So now I am completely delusional and ignorant?? :( wow ok.. that us pretty mean. I was just offering what I thought. It isnt like I make these consoles. The power gap is there yes. But looking at the best looking games each console offers shows they are very comparable. That is what I am saying. There are more tricks and things a developer can use to make the game "LOOK" the same even if it isnt within raw power. Again Witcher 2 looks amazing and that game is for high end PCs. Aren't people saying Ryse is one of the nest looking games on console now? It isnt that huge a gap. Genesis and SNES had a big gap too, yet those games also "LOOKED" the same.


I'm currently freaking WORKING on both of these platforms and the major discrepancy is that the Xbox One is far harder to optimise for. This is "cell processor/blast processing" propaganda at it's finest.

Case in point; Watch_Dogs. The codeheads got everything working very much equal on both XB1 and PS4, but we had a few hours of problems getting textures working right, but XB1 took longer to optimise movement.


Yeah exactly. It takes more effort to really make them the same. And because of that the effort or work may not be done leaving larger version differences. That is what I have been saying. I am not trying to say that a developer has magic and can make any game look like anything on anything.
---
Proud owner of all consoles. Nintendo ID- Ragebit, Steam- Rixgear
PSN- OneLibra, Gamertag- Ragebit, 3DSFC- 2793-0608-4349
#14Juzten76Posted 2/19/2014 1:04:17 PM
SigmaLongshot posted...
Rixgear posted...
Viet0ne posted...
No generation has had two systems launch at the same time with this significant difference of hardware performance.

The PS3 and 360 summation of performance were not significantly different. The combined performance of the Cell and RSX provided better performance than the Xenos in the 360 by itself. That's why developers eventually brought games to parity and exclusives were slightly better. The GPU in the 360 was also 50% more powerful in majority of GPU functions in comparison to the RSX alone, hence why multiplats performed better on the 360.

The Xbox One has no additional hardware to make up the difference to be optimized like the PS3 did.

Anyone who believes developers can get the same performance out of the Xbox One that the PS4 can provide is ignorant and delusional. If hardware wasn't a ceiling, then why can't developers simply optimize for the PS3 and 360 even further to get the same performance as the Xbox One and PS4.

Hardware has limitations. Optimizations allow you to use the performance as close to the limitations as possible. You can't simply optimize and go beyond the capabilities of the hardware.


So now I am completely delusional and ignorant?? :( wow ok.. that us pretty mean. I was just offering what I thought. It isnt like I make these consoles. The power gap is there yes. But looking at the best looking games each console offers shows they are very comparable. That is what I am saying. There are more tricks and things a developer can use to make the game "LOOK" the same even if it isnt within raw power. Again Witcher 2 looks amazing and that game is for high end PCs. Aren't people saying Ryse is one of the nest looking games on console now? It isnt that huge a gap. Genesis and SNES had a big gap too, yet those games also "LOOKED" the same.


I'm currently freaking WORKING on both of these platforms and the major discrepancy is that the Xbox One is far harder to optimise for. This is "cell processor/blast processing" propaganda at it's finest.

Case in point; Watch_Dogs. The codeheads got everything working very much equal on both XB1 and PS4, but we had a few hours of problems getting textures working right, but XB1 took longer to optimise movement.


Stop making so much sense! They're running out of ammo!
#15FadingLightsPosted 2/19/2014 1:08:48 PM
Reflex-Arc posted...
To a point, yes, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone. We're going to see some great looking Xbox One games during its lifecycle, but there is simply no denying that the PS4 is just a more capable machine.


This.

It's really all there is to it.

Being more difficult to develop for was bad enough for the Xbox One, then having a weaker CPU and GPU was another gigantic blow, but now there is a potentially new problem and it comes down to sales.

The PS4 is hugely dominating and likely has this gen in its palm already, so this will very likely see developers putting more effort into fully optimising the PS4 hardware, making it the lead platform, then just doing a sloppy seconds quick port to the One, which will next to guarantee the eSRAM being ignored.
#16Team_NinjaPosted 2/19/2014 1:22:11 PM
I said this on another thread, the PS4 may be more powerful, but the Xbox One is also powerful in it's own right compared to the specs of the old gen hardware, yet the xbox one games are coming out looking not much better than PS3 and Xbox 360 games. Xbox 360 had 512mb ram, PS3 only had 256mb, while these new consoles have 8GB, not all used, still 10+ times more than old gen. The processor is better. Everything is better. Yet the Xbox One games come out looking like ps3/xbo 360 games. PS4 games looking better than Xbox One games? Understandable and it makes sense. Xbox One games looking like old gen games?????????

Something doesn't add up here.
#17SigmaLongshotPosted 2/19/2014 1:25:45 PM
FadingLights posted...
Reflex-Arc posted...
To a point, yes, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone. We're going to see some great looking Xbox One games during its lifecycle, but there is simply no denying that the PS4 is just a more capable machine.


This.

It's really all there is to it.

Being more difficult to develop for was bad enough for the Xbox One, then having a weaker CPU and GPU was another gigantic blow, but now there is a potentially new problem and it comes down to sales.

The PS4 is hugely dominating and likely has this gen in its palm already, so this will very likely see developers putting more effort into fully optimising the PS4 hardware, making it the lead platform, then just doing a sloppy seconds quick port to the One, which will next to guarantee the eSRAM being ignored.


Another chap who assumes spec-bloat means something won't alter the landscape of game development.

Ever attempted to port the model of a fire hydrant from a PC to a PS4? Damned infuriating.

It's like an alien glove that has six fingers. If the standard for so long is five fingers, you'll end up with five fingers and a tumour.

"So, build the sixth finger properly - PS4 only!" you cry. But the asset limit only gave us sufficient resources to make one robust hand. Are you asking us to completely neglect the hand in favour of the sixth finger? The research and effort is about the same.
---
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/