Has anyone been able to tell us WHY the developers can't make games run at 1080p
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
Consoles are setup a little different than actual PCs.
Talk about an understatement, do you even know what you're talking about?
Xbox One - The console that made me the PC gamer I am today.
Yah like dahgs?
I keep posting this, but here we go:
The PS4 has an in-built mandatory developmental language platform. Let's call it... a concert stage that's been pre-built with purple lights and a purple backdrop.
The Xbox One has an open developmental arvhitecture. In the same metaphor, that's multiple sites for stages, of which there are only foundations laid in order to develop the shape and theme of any number of unique stages upon.
In real terms this means more flexibility on the Xbox One end, but quicker, more streamlined development on the PS4. The creator in me loves the playground to build tools on the One, but the guy who likes to see results in me loves the rapid nature of the pre-set, more rigid PlayStation development platform (and after developing on PS3, it's like night and day, let me tell you!)
This means the optimization stage isn't significantly HARDER on the One, but it is reached significantly LATER than that of the PS4. Projects with deadlines suffer.
However, projects where we have longer time to play with building on our "stage" work out far better for us; The Division's Snowdrop engine is running natively on Xbox One as host platform, and the programmers are enjoying the creative freedom of the builders and editors.
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/
The actual answer is simple, tc: xb1 was released in 2013 and designed for the future. Most developers are still coding as if it's 2012 because that's when most of their games began development.
The Xb1 will produce graphics and native resolutions on par with those offered by ps4 when the xb1 hardware philosophy is better understood. That's the god-honest truth.
Do a google search for 'xbox one esram' and read about it. Theres actually a lot of very cool things being discussed and discovered by developers regarding xb1 right now. Which makes perfect sense because NOW would be the time theyd be tinkering with it--not 3/4ths of the way through games they made for last gen systems.
MSI Z87-G45 | I7-4771 Turbo | GTX 770 4GB GDDR5 | Corsair HX 850W |
Kingston Hyper X 8GB DDR3 | Seagate 1TB 128 MB Cache HD | RS Challenger Case |
Cowboy082288 posted...I love how you can tell the first 3 posters didn't even read the TCs post.
It's not the console industry. It's the overall technology industry. You have to keep in mind that when the PS3 launched, Blu-Ray players were anywhere from $250-$500 because they had just been released. So to sell a console for $600 with arguably the best BR drive in it plus it had to play games and make them look good, you're talking about something with a lot of development and production cost.
MonicasBack ~This is an interesting topic, I could imagine my mom or someone else who has zero knowledge of games making it.
I keep posting this, but here we go:
I've heard devs say that the ESRAM is to small and that 1080p textures need at least 45MB of RAM (I'm assuming they are talking about more demanding AAA titles not just any game). Is this your thought process as well or do you disagree? If so why?
Too many factors work against it, but the main reasons;
-Wanted to be more of a media box which needs to have access to many apps simultaneously. BUT!
-Requires a lot of ram, so they lock themselves in with 8 gigs of DDR3. BUT!
-That type is too slow for graphics (which is why PC graphics cards come with their own GDDR5 ram) so they have to add ESRAM to compensate for the speed. BUT!
-They can only add up to 32 megs of ESRAM because of size and cost, which is too small for today's graphics in the 1080p range with modern effects (64 would've been decent, Infamous SS graphics require ~80 for their framebuffer and graphics). It is doable, but not without sacrifices (Forza), or really, REALLY good coders.
So in short; Media/App focus -> Slow DDR3 -> Small 32mb ESRAM -> Strict resolution requirements.
But this is about both systems, and PS4 is feeling it as well (Killzone MP). Everybody cheaped out in some way, which is why this is always going to be an issue going forward.
As for the reason PC gamers can choose? Because every PC is different, and devs for those games need players to be able to adjust their options so that the game can run to their satisfaction. Some cards and CPUs can do effects A, B, and C, and some can't or some can do some things some times, or hey, gots a new PC component so it's a whole new round of optimizations. Also it's just expected at this point.
Consoles are one uniform, permanent form for every single user, so devs can decide what is best, and the less the user can tinker with anything that is absolutely not needed to be tinkered with, the less chances there are of bugs and crashes happening. Also the big 3 don't want ANYTHING getting in the way of popping in the game and playing (almost these days) instantly, so they pretty much say no anyway unless there are very special circumstances.
You will accept this fact.
in order to achieve 1080p/60fps developers would have to learn & utilize the 32mb esram which is like a piece of super fast RAM...it is supposed to make up for the slower GDDR3 ram they went with
its new and they don't have the time or money to figure it out now
meanwhile the ps4 & PC's have unified memory, which is a lot more simpler
just like last gen when the ps3 was more difficult to port to, the xbox one has effectively switched places for now...
WU-TANG vs BF4
Add user to Ignore List after reporting