Support NeoGAF

[Brad Grenz]

900p being supported by TVs (which I don't think is as common as you think, most are designed to handle standard HD resolutions over HDMI like 720p, 1080i and 1080p) is not why you would choose that resolution since both the Xbox One and PS4 are never going to output anything but whatever your chosen output resolution is. No matter what the game does it is going to be automatically scaled to 1080p or 720p. Devs can choose any arbitrary resolution they want because the display panes in both can resize anything in any colorspace to the proper output format automatically.

 

[viveks86]

Theoretically, yeah?

I still don't believe this feature exists on the PS4. I believe the system is locked while doing Remote Play - so no other apps can be run, even Netflix.

Please prove me wrong though.

You are correct. The interface to the PS4 will be locked during remote play. KidBeta is speculating the possibility of unlocking it. I think there are far too many design considerations to bother with such a feature. As things stand now, there will be no parallel interfaces to the same PS4.

 

[SHADES]

Disagree, MS has a great track record of philanthropy & they've done work to create permanent solutions to 3rd world issues.

Idk whether MS was the first but every big corporation including has to do this & they ALSO were 1 of the first to file a lawsuit to release NSA info to consumers..so just stop it.

DRM was awesome..they may have not implemented it that well. But the idea of playing without discs & renting digital games was incredible.

Talking about "so just stop it" DRM was awesome? GTFO.......oh wait.

 

[Perkel]

900p being supported by TVs (which I don't think is as common as you think, most are designed to handle standard HD resolutions over HDMI like 720p, 1080i and 1080p) is not why you would choose that resolution since both the Xbox One and PS4 are never going to output anything but whatever your chosen output resolution is. No matter what the game does it is going to be automatically scaled to 1080p or 720p. Devs can choose any arbitrary resolution they want because the display panes in both can resize anything in any colorspace to the proper output format automatically.

If tv supports 1080p then 99% it supports 1600x900

I bought my tv in 2007 kdl40w2000 and it stpports ton of different resolutions even weird aspect ratios. Back then 1080p sets were not common

 

[viveks86]

Talking about "so just stop it" DRM was awesome? GTFO.......oh wait.

RIP

Kanyewesting
Banned
(Today, 03:50 PM)

 

[KidBeta]

You are correct. The interface to the PS4 will be locked during remote play. KidBeta is speculating the possibility of unlocking it. I think there are far too many design considerations to bother with such a feature. As things stand now, there will be no parallel interfaces to the same PS4.

Yeah one of the issues is how much of a remote play experience do you wish to provide and how consistent do you want it to be, I have a feeling it will never happen due to the want for a consistent and fully fledged remote play experience

 

[Perkel]

Yeah one of the issues is how much of a remote play experience do you wish to provide and how consistent do you want it to be, I have a feeling it will never happen due to the want for a consistent and fully fledged remote play experience

More like:

person1: "People are confused that they can't play Killzone at the same time they stream Driveclub"
person2: "let's put it in remoteplay mode with big sign that says "you are in remote play mode ! USE YOUR VITA or end this mode with circle""

It is design problem not hardware problem...

 

[Brad Grenz]

If tv supports 1080p then 99% it supports 1600x900

I bought my tv in 2007 kdl40w2000 and it stpports ton of different resolutions even weird aspect ratios. Back then 1080p sets were not common

Are you connecting via HDMI or VGA or DVI? Are you talking about a PC or a console? AFAIK over HDMI PS3 won't do anything but standard NTSC/PAL/HDTV resolutions, so 480i, 480p, 576i, 576p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p. I believe Xbox 360 is the same. PCs will give you a lot more flexibility on resolution over HDMI since there are lots of HDMI monitors out there with resolutions like 900p or 768p, but I doubt either PS4 or Xbox One will give you those options. In my experience TVs may support lots of VESA resolutions over VGA or DVI, but not usually over HDMI.

 

[lightchris]

900p is next lower standardized 16:9 resolution supported by almost all TVs and monitors. Your TV/monitor won't support any other 16:9 resolution than 1920x1080, 1600x900, 1360x768, 1280x720. (naturally there are bigger than 1080 16:9 resolutions). Game can render how it want but it needs later to scale to one of those resolutions.

Even if that's true (I'm not sure for TV's, monitors support more resolutions), do you think the Xbox One or PS4 will support 900p output? That would surprise me. I think everything is going to be upscaled to 1080p or downscaled to 720p.

 

[Tabular]

Speaking for myself (who also agrees that I've enjoyed the Live ecosystem more than PSN), most of these would be my current experiences with the 360 compared to PS3 (which I've owned a couple times):

-Faster downloads
-Faster connectivity
-Smoother interface
-Better transitions from app to app
-Less downtime for maintenance
-Less server issues (crashes, digital download issues - looking at you PS3 GTA 5)
-More robust server-side support
-More transparency about service for Xbone (300k initial servers, Cloud service descriptions)
-More 3rd party early access to DLC
-Greater variety of apps and overall services (with UI unique to Xbox)
-More streamlined, lively, social connectivity (friends list setup, party chat, messaging)
-The majority of my friends are on Xbox Live (I know, I'm reaching on that one)

Never had an issue with PSN. It was the better service as it always worked well for me, was free, and you could share digital games with 5 friends. You did have to pay for PS+ but it was still a lot better than XBLG because you get free or cheap games.

PSN looks set to one up Microsoft this coming gen. Xbox live won't have spectate mode which to me looks like the best new feature next gen. You can easily see what your friends are doing, join in their match, or even take over controls for them. MS is trying to copy it but it won't be ready at launch. Then theres the second screen functions like playing PS4 games on Vita and interacting with games from mobile devices. Sounds really cool IMO.

 

[Whitechocolatekrispies]

Cool so PS4 > Xbone.

Can anyone explain what real world differences this makes?

Are we only going to see 1080p60fps on ps4 while 900p30fps xbone.

Or are we going to see more complex in game simulations? Faster load times? Better resolutions, less pop in? Better physics, higher polygon count and longer draw distances?

How are developers realistically going to utilise this performance difference?

I know first party games are going to really push the boundary's aka The Order 1886 etc.

But this performance difference won't mean much if the xbone just gets the same experience at a lower resolution/frame rate.

 

[Tabular]

Cool so PS4 > Xbone.

Can anyone explain what real world differences this makes?

Are we only going to see 1080p60fps on ps4 while 900p30fps xbone.

Or are we going to see more complex in game simulations? Faster load times? Better resolutions, less pop in? Better physics, higher polygon count and longer draw distances?

How are developers realistically going to utilise this performance difference?

I know first party games are going to really push the boundary's aka The Order 1886 etc.

But this performance difference won't mean much if the xbone just gets the same experience at a lower resolution/frame rate.

You should really just read the thread, or at least the OP. But 50% better performance in actual games means primarily better resolution and potentially a combination of frame rate, textures, lighting, reflections, shadowing, and/or physics. It's roughly the difference between Dreamcast and PS2 but the two are coming out at the same time and the more powerful one is $100 cheaper.

 

[SHADES]

RIP

Yup, reading his posts all I could was "Damn put the crack pipe down son".

 

[viveks86]

Cool so PS4 > Xbone.

Can anyone explain what real world differences this makes?

Are we only going to see 1080p60fps on ps4 while 900p30fps xbone.

Or are we going to see more complex in game simulations? Faster load times? Better resolutions, less pop in? Better physics, higher polygon count and longer draw distances?

How are developers realistically going to utilise this performance difference?

I know first party games are going to really push the boundary's aka The Order 1886 etc.

But this performance difference won't mean much if the xbone just gets the same experience at a lower resolution/frame rate.

That depends on who you are asking. For people who primarily play multplat games, such as COD, BF4 and NFS, the resolution/frame rate matters. If you are going to shell out so much money on a console, you would rather choose the best available experience for the game(s) you are interested in, right?

Also, faster load times, less pop in, longer draw distances are all possibilities.

It remains to be seen how this pans out. We already know that NFS will look better on the PS4. What that means, we would know only if we get the same footage on both platforms. Right now, there is a scarcity of multiplat footage on the xbox one, so it's really difficult to judge.

And lastly, it will be a while before in-game performance differences become clear between the two platforms. Right now, everyone is rushing to meet the launch deadline and would probably go for parity. If you see any difference in launch games, you can reasonably expect the gap to widen over time.

 

[dragonelite]

Cool so PS4 > Xbone.

Can anyone explain what real world differences this makes?

Are we only going to see 1080p30fps on ps4 while 900p30fps xbone.

Or are we going to see more complex in game simulations? Faster load times? Better resolutions, less pop in? Better physics, higher polygon count and longer draw distances?

How are developers realistically going to utilise this performance difference?

I know first party games are going to really push the boundary's aka The Order 1886 etc.

But this performance difference won't mean much if the xbone just gets the same experience at a lower resolution/frame rate.

That will pretty much be it unless devs both target same res on both platform then X1 will miss effects or have less precise effects which most probably won't notice..

 

[SHADES]

Does anyone remember when you guys talked about my insider on my site... and he was right about the rumble on the trigger buttons... and some other right stuff.... yet also some wrong stuff too... but my point..

Does anyone remember quoting my story about the 2 scaler chips and it being BC, but also remember he said himself that Sony was more powerful. Anyone remember that? Meh.. I do. I think it's funny that he (a guy that works at ms) even said that Sony would be more powerful.

Crazy.

Care to provide a link? Don't think I was around for this. PM is fine if you wish.

 

[schuey7]

Never had an issue with PSN. It was the better service as it always worked well for me, was free, and you could share digital games with 5 friends. You did have to pay for PS+ but that made it a lot better than XBLG because you get free or cheap games.

PSN looks set to one up Microsoft this coming gen. Xbox live won't have spectate mode which to me looks like the best new feature next gen. You can easily see what your friends are doing, join in their match, or even take over controls for them. MS is trying to copy it but it won't be ready at launch. Plus Gaikai streaming next year will be pretty cool.

For me personally psn is both painfully slow and unreliable.I find myself dreading switching on my ps3 after a long downtime because of the horrifically slow updates.I know a lot of the issues are down to PS3 hardware and lack of Sony foresight but even then I feel PSN speed needs to improve to compare to Live.

 

[Moneyhats2k5]

For me personally psn is both painfully slow and unreliable.I find myself dreading switching on my ps3 after a long downtime because of the horrifically slow updates.I know a lot of the issues are down to PS3 hardware and lack of Sony foresight but even then I feel PSN speed needs to improve to compare to Live.

They have auto system updates for all users now.

 

[Tabular]

For me personally psn is both painfully slow and unreliable.I find myself dreading switching on my ps3 after a long downtime because of the horrifically slow updates.I know a lot of the issues are down to PS3 hardware and lack of Sony foresight but even then I feel PSN speed needs to improve to compare to Live.

Ya. I can agree that installing is a little annoying for bigger downloads but the xmb is so much better than dashboard the ps3 is still preferable to me. I don't get "PSN is painfully slow" though. It's never slow for me. Unless you mean the new store? The online worked great and being free is a nice bonus.

 

[viveks86]

For me personally psn is both painfully slow and unreliable.I find myself dreading switching on my ps3 after a long downtime because of the horrifically slow updates.I know a lot of the issues are down to PS3 hardware and lack of Sony foresight but even then I feel PSN speed needs to improve to compare to Live.

It does need to improve, and I'm sure it will. That's why they are making PS+ mandatory for online multiplayer. Improving the infrastructure would be a major area where that money goes, hopefully.

 

[Vashetti]

For me personally psn is both painfully slow and unreliable.I find myself dreading switching on my ps3 after a long downtime because of the horrifically slow updates.I know a lot of the issues are down to PS3 hardware and lack of Sony foresight but even then I feel PSN speed needs to improve to compare to Live.

PS3 firmware updates take about 2-3 minutes for me at most.

Might want to change your internet provider.

 

[mjswooosh]

Ahh, I see. It'll be strange for the flagship Xbone game to be 720p, then.

Realistically, can the human eye really tell the difference? I've been a vocal critic of several of MS's decisions with Xbone. But, Im not really sure 720p vs 1080p matters. Stable frames, fresh/exciting art design, etc seem more important than check box stats. I'm more worried that Halo 4's mistakes will be repeated. It was and still is a gorgeous game on 9 yr old hardware. I think Halo 5 will likely amaze us graphically. But what remains to be seen is how well it all gels, from story arc in SP to MP balance.

 

[Moneyhats2k5]

PS3 firmware updates take about 2-3 minutes for me at most.

Might want to change your internet provider.

0 wait time for ps3 game updates if you have PSN+ after initial installs.

 

[stryke]

0 wait time if you have PSN+ after initial installs.

I thought it was available to all users now...?

 

[Noi]

But this performance difference won't mean much if the xbone just gets the same experience at a lower resolution/frame rate.

Just chimming in here, but this would be enough for some people. This generation alone has enough examples of games like Bayonetta and Ultimate MvC3 having PS3 versions with worse performance than their 360 counterparts which lead to a perception of games running better on a 360 than on a PS3, even if that gap was small to begin with and all but closed by now (as evidenced with recent multiplats). By comparison, the PS4 to XB1 gap is a lot bigger. It's true that others won't care and will play on their platform of choice regardless, but enough games of poorer quality on the system can affect what people hear/read about it, like how the WiiU having some atrocious 3rd party ports early on made some believe that it's hardware was worse than PS360 hardware.

 

[Neutralfanboy]

There will never be a multi-platform game that is 60 fps on PS4 but only 30 fps on the Xbox One. They will reduce the resolution always instead of fps.

 

[KidBeta]

There will never be a multi-platform game that is 60 fps on PS4 but only 30 fps on the Xbox One. They will reduce the resolution always instead of fps.

Reducing resolution isn't a one size fits all solution to bad performance.

 

[viveks86]

Realistically, can the human eye really tell the difference? I've been a vocal critic of several of MS's decisions with Xbone. But, Im not really sure 720p vs 1080p matters. Stable frames, fresh/exciting art design, etc seem more important than check box stats. I'm more worried that Halo 4's mistakes will be repeated. It was and still is a gorgeous game on 9 yr old hardware. I think Halo 5 will likely amaze us graphically. But what remains to be seen is how well it all gels, from story arc in SP to MP balance.

There is a separate thread discussing this topic alone. You will find all kinds of opinions in there.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=696202

In short, yes, 720p vs 108p is quite a noticeable difference. GG actually ran focus tests on volunteers to understand their sensitivity to resolution vs frame rate. Resolution came on top. We are far from reaching diminishing returns for resolution. 900 to 1080p may be a small jump that may go unnoticed by some, but 720p should be a lot more noticeable.

Now, should that take priority over other aspects of gaming? It's complicated and I haven't made up my mind. I've tried debating on both sides of that fence. What I can say is that we have reached a point where most of us have invested in full HDTVs. It is only reasonable that we expect them to be fully utilized.

 

[mrklaw]

Sure it's conjecture. What is so wrong with basing your opinions on how current gen went? Sony had much better first party support this gen. They invested in their studios and reaped the benefits. Most of us think that Sony will have a better first party offering this gen as well because they have already established that base. Could MS do better than Sony this gen despite being behind right now? Absolutely, but I tend to think that they won't due to the investments Sony has already made.

Same thing goes for the internet service. MS is heavily invested into the Xbox Live ecosystem so I tend to think they are going to continue to be the leader in that regard. That doesn't mean Sony can't overtake them.

When it comes to these hardware power differences, they are cold hard facts and it’s impossible to argue that Sony isn’t ahead. But when it comes to Live/PSN, why not base it on previous gen until more facts come out? Microsoft has talked a lot about an improved reputation system and smart match. Sony has made some improvements as well, but until I see more information out there I’m going to look at current gen as the benchmark.

edit: Fixed some spelling. Spoiled by browser spell check and we have an old crappy IE explorer at work

Nothing wrong with conjecture based on previous experience.

But PSN an now is much better than PSN an was at launch. If you're an Xbox user you might not be keeping up with PSN on developments and it can easily lead to 'oh it is still shit'. Plus take a look at Vita to see how that experience is already a good step up on PS3, which should give you confidence for PS4

If you're slightly worried about either, you could hold off on your purchase until you've had time to see how they compare in reality?

 

[Legendary_Red]

There will never be a multi-platform game that is 60 fps on PS4 but only 30 fps on the Xbox One. They will reduce the resolution always instead of fps.

I don't see why it wouldn't be like 30 FPS on both, but some extra eye candy via better PC textures, particles, and lighting on the PS4. I don't think any developer wants to feature one version of the games running at an explicitly lower resolution and/or FPS.

This is of course assuming that developers even bother with it though, my honest opinion is that we will see almost total parity across most games. They will make sure their games run on an acceptable performance on the Xbone and then let the extra power of the PS4 go unused to save themselves the effort and PR.

 

[viveks86]

I don't see why it wouldn't be like 30 FPS on both, but some extra eye candy via better PC textures, particles, and lighting on the PS4. I don't think any developer wants to feature one version of the games running at an explicitly lower resolution and/or FPS.

This is of course assuming that developers even bother with it though, my honest opinion is that we will see almost total parity across most games. They will make sure their games run on an acceptable performance on the Xbone and then let the extra power of the PS4 go unused to save themselves the effort and PR.

Seems unlikely to me. I can imagine companies like EA doing that. But that is already not the case with NFS. I find it difficult to think companies like CDPR would just go for parity. They will push each platform as hard as they can with the tools they have. If that means perceptible differences, then so be it. Don't think they would care about whatever PR issues it could create. Besides, what PR issues are you referring to? There are so many multiplats this gen that did not achieve parity. So there is no reason to think next gen would be any different.

 

[softie]

There will never be a multi-platform game that is 60 fps on PS4 but only 30 fps on the Xbox One. They will reduce the resolution always instead of fps.

Madden 2008 says there can certainly be those kind of games (30fps on PS3, 60fps on 360)

 

[Amused]

I don't see why it wouldn't be like 30 FPS on both, but some extra eye candy via better PC textures, particles, and lighting on the PS4. I don't think any developer wants to feature one version of the games running at an explicitly lower resolution and/or FPS.

This is of course assuming that developers even bother with it though, my honest opinion is that we will see almost total parity across most games. They will make sure their games run on an acceptable performance on the Xbone and then let the extra power of the PS4 go unused to save themselves the effort and PR.

If this happens, and it very well might, I hope PS4 users will reward the developers that push the boundaries - and punish those too lazy, too moneyhatted or too ill informed to even try.

If enough people push this by expressing themselves both with words and with their wallets the PR effect of being one of the lazy/stupid/out-of-touch developers should make everyone do all they can to produce the best product possible come year 2 of the next generation.

 

[stryke]

How does making the most of respective platforms = bad PR?

 

[killatopak]

They could make it 1080p and 60fps if they do this


EDIT: oh shit, this thing is huge. Forgive me mods

That is one linear map.

 

[vireland]

If it becomes common practice for PS4 games to be held back graphically just because of the Xbone, I'm going to be pissed. The implication that devs/pubs might do it just to keep MS happy is really disturbing.

IF it happens, it will last only until the Sony first party games quickly show the practice up. When the Sony first party games are running at higher res and/or framerate consistently, title after title, 3rd party will have no choice but to step it up on the PS4 and remove the artificial constraints.

XBONE will not touch the success of the 360. Look at the history of consoles. Only Nintendo and Sony managed to lead two successive console generations - ONCE each. It's very, VERY hard to do, and Microsoft isn't anywhere close to the ballpark of joining that club. Hubris bred from their strong showing with the XBOX360 mortally wounded their next platform.

 

[mrklaw]

You can, it's already been confirmed. Example: you can Remote Play a PS4 game on your Vita while your significant other watches Netflix on the tv.

No you can't. I think you're referring to that Sony promo video? They were using the vita TV in the lounge for Netflix - the PS4 next to the TV wasn't being used (the guy turns it on) and then he remote plays it in the next room.

 

[travisbickle]

Seems unlikely to me. I can imagine companies like EA doing that. But that is already not the case with NFS. I find it difficult to think companies like CDPR would just go for parity. They will push each platform as hard as they can with the tools they have. If that means perceptible differences, then so be it. Don't think they would care about whatever PR issues it could create. Besides, what PR issues are you referring to? There are so many multiplats this gen that did not achieve parity. So there is no reason to think next gen would be any different.

Not long to see the first wave of games. I'm interested in assassin's creed because about 6 months ago they released a "next gen tech" video talking about volumetric fog, changeable weather with individually lighted raindrops and plant life that moved to the weather condition, lots of layers to the water rendering etc... I want to see how much of that has made it into the restricted specs of PS4 and more restricted xbox1.

 

[Perkel]

Are you connecting via HDMI or VGA or DVI? Are you talking about a PC or a console? AFAIK over HDMI PS3 won't do anything but standard NTSC/PAL/HDTV resolutions, so 480i, 480p, 576i, 576p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p. I believe Xbox 360 is the same. PCs will give you a lot more flexibility on resolution over HDMI since there are lots of HDMI monitors out there with resolutions like 900p or 768p, but I doubt either PS4 or Xbox One will give you those options. In my experience TVs may support lots of VESA resolutions over VGA or DVI, but not usually over HDMI.

Both HDMI and DVI in case of PC
I use it for my PC and PS3.

Yes consoles really don't have any other resolutions and new consoles will probably scale everything to 1920x1080.

 

[NBtoaster]

Madden 2008 says there can certainly be those kind of games (30fps on PS3, 60fps on 360)

Yeah games like that that are starved of money/time or are outsourced or are afterthought ports or are in development hell will probably have big differences.

That's why the idea that MS will pay for parity is so silly, development rarely progresses as planned and someone telling you to hold back one platform wont stop another one from failing to meet its targets. Or if you're in a really stressful situation and the PS4 version is failing to meet targets and Xbone version hardly runs at all you can't accomodate any demands.

 

[viveks86]

Not long to see the first wave of games. I'm interested in assassin's creed because about 6 months ago they released a "next gen tech" video talking about volumetric fog, changeable weather with individually lighted raindrops and plant life that moved to the weather condition, lots of layers to the water rendering etc... I want to see how much of that has made it into the restricted specs of PS4 and more restricted xbox1.

Yup! And since those titles are cross gen, would be interesting to see how they look across all platforms. I'd expect it to be something like this!

 

[Biker19]

IF it happens, it will last only until the Sony first party games quickly show the practice up. When the Sony first party games are running at higher res and/or framerate consistently, title after title, 3rd party will have no choice but to step it up on the PS4 and remove the artificial constraints.

I think that most gamers will call out on Developer's BS when they start looking at Sony's 1st party titles graphically. It's bound to happen.

XBONE will not touch the success of the 360. Look at the history of consoles. Only Nintendo and Sony managed to lead two successive console generations - ONCE each. It's very, VERY hard to do, and Microsoft isn't anywhere close to the ballpark of joining that club. Hubris bred from their strong showing with the XBOX360 mortally wounded their next platform.

I agree with this. The main reason Microsoft got lucky with the Xbox 360 was because of Sony's constant fuck-ups with the PS3 (Robbie Bach admitted it here).

They weren't even exactly the market leader of last gen; they just grabbed more marketshare from Sony. If anything, the Xbox 360 is the "Sega Genesis/MegaDrive" in terms of success.

 

[BaBaRaRa]

It makes no sense, other than being less than 1080p, so less fillrate/bandwidth used.

1080p is the magic number. It's the biggest 16:9 resolution where
a)both axes are even divisible by 8
b)the number of pixels is below a power of 2 (2^21 - 1920*1080 =23552)

Basically, it's ideal for memory alignment and memory consumption. You can fit a 32bit 1080p image almost exaclty into an 8MiB memory chip. You never have to worry about extra padding bytes after each line, because every line's already naturally aligned to a 32 byte boundary. You can tile and swizzle it without every worrying about "partial" blocks at the edges of the image.

1080p is magic.

900p makes no goddamn sense.

Sure, there's no arguing with the elegance of the numbers, but is there a practical use of 900px with the scaler? Something about stretching a pixel by 1.2 that facilitates the process and gives a better scaled output? Or is it really just 'pick a number, any number'?

 

[killatopak]

All this negative talk about PSN is nonsense. It's has a bad reputations that has stuck with the network even though it's a legitimate service now. I have absolutely no issues with download speeds which is another thing people complain about.

Also, all the marketing BS MS has been throwing out there with "the power of the cloud" is all nonsense. For example "drivatars" are nothing new or revolutionary. Tekken has had "Ghost Battle" for a while now and it's pretty much the same thing.

One thing I give advantage to MS is the option of developers using Azure at a discount. But that still DOES NOT guarantee dedicated servers on every MP game

I laugh at the "drivatars" when I can do that in my PSP in Dissidia.

 

[Whitechocolatekrispies]

That depends on who you are asking. For people who primarily play multplat games, such as COD, BF4 and NFS, the resolution/frame rate matters. If you are going to shell out so much money on a console, you would rather choose the best available experience for the game(s) you are interested in, right?

Too true, current/last gen people were getting all up in arms over a 3fps difference and throwing screenshots under the microscope to find the difference between AA technologies.

But I don't care about that, I'm going for the better option the PS4. But I also don't really give much shit about the resolution and framerate, sure it's nice to know they're better, but I wouldn't be crying about it if I had an Xbone.

Also, faster load times, less pop in, longer draw distances are all possibilities.

This, this is what I'm more interested in. Everyone throws out numbers, but has anyone addressed the speed differences between DDR3 and GDDR5 RAM in texture loading, pop ins etc.

I want to know if the PS4 will get differences like PhyX on and off in Borderlands 2 compared to Xbone?

Stuff that visually changes the way the game plays.

 

[CadetMahoney]

There are so many multiplats this gen that did not achieve parity. So there is no reason to think next gen would be any different.

Pretty much, PS4 will have no issue being the superior version for multi-plat and the go-to gaming machine for next-gen. ppl saying devs will not take advantage of PS4's 50% extra horsepower for more stable framerates, better lighting etc. are deluded.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Really? Netflix would be running on the same PS4 as you were remote playing from?

I don't believe this.

That's a good question actually

You are correct. The interface to the PS4 will be locked during remote play. KidBeta is speculating the possibility of unlocking it. I think there are far too many design considerations to bother with such a feature. As things stand now, there will be no parallel interfaces to the same PS4.

I think to be able to do remote play while still using the PS4 for apps like Netflix would require Sony to reserve GPU/RAM and other system resources like MS has. This is where it gets interesting. You balance features with what you want to dedicate to games. I'm no tech guy but is my statement false? Please correct if it is

 

[lupinko]

IF it happens, it will last only until the Sony first party games quickly show the practice up. When the Sony first party games are running at higher res and/or framerate consistently, title after title, 3rd party will have no choice but to step it up on the PS4 and remove the artificial constraints.

So not even at launch? Because Killzone SF is already 1080p native at 60fps (most of the time).

 

[geordiemp]

BF4 seems to be in a minor identity crisis on next gen consoles to me - it has always been the eye candy shooter with large maps and nice graphics, and not the 60 fps twitch shooter arcade game.

Dice prides itself in its Frostbite fancy engine and graphical prowess.

If it does not do 1080P like Killzone on Ps4, where does it leave BF4 on consoles ?

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Never had an issue with PSN. It was the better service as it always worked well for me, was free, and you could share digital games with 5 friends. You did have to pay for PS+ but it was still a lot better than XBLG because you get free or cheap games.

PSN looks set to one up Microsoft this coming gen. Xbox live won't have spectate mode which to me looks like the best new feature next gen. You can easily see what your friends are doing, join in their match, or even take over controls for them. MS is trying to copy it but it won't be ready at launch. Then theres the second screen functions like playing PS4 games on Vita and interacting with games from mobile devices. Sounds really cool IMO.

Yup. And the fact that PSN for Vita is miles ahead of PS3 is very promising