Infinite clouds.
EDGE: "Power struggle: the real differences between PS4 and Xbox One performance"
- Thread starter Musiol
- Start date
Infinite clouds.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Are Xbox games not going to look better and better over time as PS4 games will, or does the PS4 just have that much higher of a ceiling?
Sorry if this has already been said but surely a developer wouldn't cut back the PS4 versions of a cross platform game to match the xb1 as couldn't this hit sales?
Eg. Theoretically next year Fifa v Pes. EA decide to throttle the PS4 version of FIFA but Konami do the opposite and max the crap out of PES on the PS4. Reviewers go mental saying PES on PS4 jizzes all over FIFA etc etc so then EA get hit in the pocket.
As a publisher wouldn't they be worrying about competition first rather than keeping platform makers happy?
Eg. Theoretically next year Fifa v Pes. EA decide to throttle the PS4 version of FIFA but Konami do the opposite and max the crap out of PES on the PS4. Reviewers go mental saying PES on PS4 jizzes all over FIFA etc etc so then EA get hit in the pocket.
As a publisher wouldn't they be worrying about competition first rather than keeping platform makers happy?
kingkaiser
Member
So...
PS4 being more powerful than Xbox One: Truth, fact, math
Midrange gaming PC already being more powerful than both: Needles dick waving
Nice double standard
un1que
Member
What? I wasn't being sarcastic. I was genuinely asking if that's what they stated how will it work? I know it helps with AI in forza but what else can it do?
To be fair, you've also got folks bringing up PC just to steer the conversation away from Xbone vs PS4 to PS4 vs PC for the sake of derailment. Usually it's a, uh, subtle? move, but hilariously enough you've got folks pretty much outright saying as much at this point.
hellmonkey
Member
It didn't happen often, but it did happen. Maybe not so much holding the ps3 version back, but gimping the 360 version.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-final-fantasy-xiii-face-off
Ouch not good new for MS (if true). All the more reason for me to wait until next year to decide which console to buy next gen.
If last gen is any indication almost everything you hear about a console before launch is BS. Until gamers get their hands on them, and real world comparisons can be done, I take everything I hear about "Next Gen" with a grain of salt.
If last gen is any indication almost everything you hear about a console before launch is BS. Until gamers get their hands on them, and real world comparisons can be done, I take everything I hear about "Next Gen" with a grain of salt.
I said damn!
But this brings up another question. How are we supposed to handle talking about multiplat games this fall? Some folks seem to be trying to make sure that PC isn't in the discussion. So will the thread title say, "Watch_Dogs Console discussion"? I don't think I've seen games segmented like that on GAF.
Manmademan
Member
exactly. and third parties aren't just competing with each other, they're competing with first party who will NOT be holding back. Need for Speed is going to have to compete with Driveclub and Gran Turismo.
on top of that, Sony has a virtual monopoly in most of the EU (MS isn't launching officially in most of it). why would EA gimp FIFA, when most of FIFA's audience isn't going to be buying the Xbox one? please your audience first.
Its a thread x1 vs ps4, it has nothing to do with the OP article.
NullPointer
Member
Yep. And... yep.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
They said that the possibility is there for MS to go to devs asking that they gimp the PS4 version of 3rd party games to be at parity with the XB1... so there's that to consider as well...
lyrick
Member
There is a risk that you could lose part of your fan base to a competitors product, but the risk of alienation your entire development house brand to an entire platform audience is probably higher.
Thank you for taking the time to respond! (No, I'm not being sarcastic).
I guess it is a bit hard for both of us to let this go since we both inject arguments into our "we should not derail the thread"-posts
I would say that most games out today can run even on integrated chipsets, though not necessarily all that well.
10 years ago, you could risk that a new game simply wouldn't run on a two year old computer, this is far less common today. The fact that Diablo III is you example doesn't exactly strengthen your argument since it will run on pretty much everything.
(That being said I threw it in the bin after a couple of days myself).
PS2 emulation is of course far more troublesome, and only for people that really likes to fiddle with the technical aspects.
I have to admit that traditional pc gaming is probably a bit to much of a hassle for the mass market, but probably not for GAF-posters. Then again, normal consoles seem to be too much hassle for the mass market.
A lot of people here seem to care a great deal about framerate and IQ so people recommending the only platform where you can complete control these aspects.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Ok I laughed lol..!All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
edit: What are e-loins though? Still dont get it.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Ha ha. You were as quick as fuck.All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
Lol quality, your gifs are epic and I got a cameo
All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
Haha, well done!
I don't know (well, yeah, I do) if you're being purposefully disingenuous or what, but this is the post I responded to, not whatever straw men you're propping up above:
I made no mention of Digital Foundry comparisons, said nothing about MS titles looking like duds or absolutely lame compared to PS4. So save me the trouble and shop that nonsense elsewhere.
I am telling you "like it is" based on experience. Waiting until next year isn't moving the goalposts, it's the intelligent thing to do based on greater familiarity with the hardware and not rushing a title to market in order to hit launch. Killer Instinct looks great, DR3 will be fun and I know full well that Halo and whatever Black Tusk is working on will bring it - but none of that changes the hardware specs out of the gate, and that sharing of tribal knowledge will also be occurring on the Sony side of things at well.
tl;dr - your talk of shifting goalposts in light of your posts makes for delicious ironing
Multi-platform developers won't hold back the PS4 version. That's a very silly way of thinking in my opinion. You have the big juggernauts like Call of Duty, Battlefield, or Fifa, who could kind of get away with it due to their popularity, but most multi-platform titles don't even break the 4-5 million mark. They need to show as good of a footing as possible to leverage themselves and garner attention.
Considering the amount of teams at work on the PS4 just at SCE WWS, not even factoring in partnerships, they'd be making life difficult for themselves competing against those titles. People like ND, SSM, GG, Sucker Punch, PD etc. aren't going to hold back. Their job is going to be to squeeze as much juice as possible out of the machine. Some of these studios will be also be releasing titles even quicker because of the expansion going on with teams and so forth. And SCE WWS is becoming a powerhouse slowly in terms of reception. They may not have anything that does COD numbers, but they're building enough of a catalogue of successful titles selling multiple millions, as well as some really strong hitters in their own right.
It's silly to allow direct competition such an advantage, especially considering PS4 will likely be the market leader. They'd essentially help set an expectation that 'exclusives' are better against the multi-platform titles. I imagine multi-platform developers will start taking advantage of whatever benefits the PS4 can provide. It's easier for them to just do what they can and optimise, rather than hold one title back for some silly parity reason. Exclusives will always have an edge, but I'm sure there'll be benefits in multi-platform titles too. It'd make no sense for there not to be.
Obviously, you may not see this at launch because there are a bunch of other issues they have to deal with, but once they start settling in with the new hardware, there will be differences. Sony already has people who are basically there to learn and teach what they can with the console, whether it's to internal parties or external parties. Some companies, like Capcom, are benefitting from it already.
Considering the amount of teams at work on the PS4 just at SCE WWS, not even factoring in partnerships, they'd be making life difficult for themselves competing against those titles. People like ND, SSM, GG, Sucker Punch, PD etc. aren't going to hold back. Their job is going to be to squeeze as much juice as possible out of the machine. Some of these studios will be also be releasing titles even quicker because of the expansion going on with teams and so forth. And SCE WWS is becoming a powerhouse slowly in terms of reception. They may not have anything that does COD numbers, but they're building enough of a catalogue of successful titles selling multiple millions, as well as some really strong hitters in their own right.
It's silly to allow direct competition such an advantage, especially considering PS4 will likely be the market leader. They'd essentially help set an expectation that 'exclusives' are better against the multi-platform titles. I imagine multi-platform developers will start taking advantage of whatever benefits the PS4 can provide. It's easier for them to just do what they can and optimise, rather than hold one title back for some silly parity reason. Exclusives will always have an edge, but I'm sure there'll be benefits in multi-platform titles too. It'd make no sense for there not to be.
Obviously, you may not see this at launch because there are a bunch of other issues they have to deal with, but once they start settling in with the new hardware, there will be differences. Sony already has people who are basically there to learn and teach what they can with the console, whether it's to internal parties or external parties. Some companies, like Capcom, are benefitting from it already.
LittleJohnny
Banned
DriveClub would have been glorious @ 60FPS on X1 if Turn10 handled it, Shame its struggling to achieve 30fps on PS4.
See what I did there? 
Love Deterrence
Member
I don't get what you're saying... Am I supposed to hold this against Microsoft? These things do change, by the way. My whole point was that I don't want to buy a PlayStation 5 when I'm still playing the Xbox One. Anyway, I don't really care, one way or the other. Like I said, I just want to play the best games on the best platforms.
All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
Damn ElTorro, my sides !!!
You are epic man, creative and funny. Thumbs up
NullPointer
Member
jim-jam bongs
Member
Nah, as much as it pains me to say it I'm with the people trying to restrict this discussion to consoles and leave out PCs. The original article is about the power differences between the Xbone and PS4; while the PC gaming market is huge and shouldn't be ignored, it's still unlikely to be the platform which receives the greatest share of attention of the three in the form of marketing and AAA exclusivity because nobody owns it in the same way they do with a console.
When we're discussing AAA games -- which, for the record, I have little to no interest in personally -- the Xbone and PS4 will lead in the hearts and minds of developers for a wide variety of reasons. That said, there will be fewer and fewer exclusives on any platform, and developers make more and better PC versions of multiplats because they can see it as clearly leaving money on the table.
I keep hearing this "More Powerful" thing. What does it really mean? We have all gotten the message now that PS4 is Graphically a more capable machine. No debate there really. But, the "More Powerful" machine to me would be the more capable machine overall.
I could list off all the reasons why I believe that the Xbone's features (snap/skype/multitasking/hdmi input/kintec voice, etc.) make it the overall more powerful machine, but it seems folks only want to focus on graphically capability. When the truth of the matter is we won't know what the "real world" differences are for months more likely years from now.
What is true is both are 10 times more powerful than their predecessors, and judging by the launch line up of both systems, each will have their share graphically impressive games. And, hey its only money, get both.
not sure what this means, but it is rather evocative.
Goddamn this post... This POST.
I don't buy the "holding back" either. Every game that purposefully holds back quality will have a disadvantage compared to titles that don't. Why would they do that? In addition, purposefully "holding back" might sometimes be even more complicated than just going straight for a good version.
gundamkyoukai
Member
Truth is PC so far ahead it don't even make sense comparing them .
Everyone should know the PC version is going to be best unless the port is trash .
PC will have best version of multiplats the only question is if those people care about PC .
EDIT ElTorro at it again lol .
Manmademan
Member
Thank you for taking the time to respond! (No, I'm not being sarcastic).
I guess it is a bit hard for both of us to let this go since we both inject arguments into our "we should not derail the thread"-posts
I would say that most games out today can run even on integrated chipsets, though not necessarily all that well.
having to worry about that at all is more than I care to do. If the game doesn't run exactly the same on my system as it does on my brothers, or in the store, or at PAX then I can't be bothered.
oh Diablo ran just fine. the usability issue i referred to there is KB+M. can't stand it. think the control scheme is trash. i might pick it up on PS4 when it's out as that version supports a dualshock 4.
it's understood in a console vs. console comparison that there is some reason why PC is excluded. none of us are new, we're all aware PC gives greater control over IQ. however, the drawbacks (for some it might be cost, for me it isnt) aren't worth it, so bringing up PC is inappropriate and helps no one.
Prince Vultan
Banned
Driveclub looking like a current gen uprez wouldn't have been glorious in the least.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
I have a little more trouble for you..
dont kill me
Ironchef3500
Banned
Exactly. Stupid kinect.
If it's a topic about Watch_Dogs in general, bring whatever platform you like to the discussion.
If it's a topic about comparing the visuals of Watch_Dogs between the Xbone & the PS4 specifically (e.g. DF article), discuss those platforms specifically.
There's really no ambiguity there.
LittleJohnny
Banned
First of all I was only joking, but you have to be out of your mind if you think Forza 5 is just an uprez when they're even using surface scattering for the paint lol.
Hockeymac18
Member
I kind of hate edge for how they constantly post trail-bait articles like this. There is obviously a spec advantage to the PS4. But I think people are being a bit disingenuous with these numbers. 50% in what way? You can't just pull one factor that aligns with that number and run with that as evidence that the entire machine is faster in that way. These consoles are much more than their specs may lead people to believe.
I work with numbers all day in my Bioinformatics/Biostatistics job, and I know just how much you can mislead with the wrong statistic. And it's quite easy to even sound like you know what you're talking about when doing so (people do it all of the time in Science)...I think anyone that is thinking it's a simple 50% difference is gonna find out the hard way once these games start coming out. You're gonna see differences, but honestly, they're going to be so small that only dumbass fanboys will care.
But this is article does bring up some interesting thoughts to my mind. Specifically, it got me thinking about a question: Why are there some developers saying that the machines are somewhat comparable, but yet we have this article?
We have people that have gone on record to say the differences are small/minimal or they're close to parity:
So why is it we have these developers going on record saying one thing, but we have other developers saying another (ZOMG 50%!)? I don't think one side is lying and the other isn't...developers wouldn't go on record and say that. They have a lot to lose to say that kind of thing. I think there's more to this than meets the eye.
Here's my take (and I know guys, I'm not an expert. I'm just trying to stand back and make sense of the situation using some reasonable reasoning based on what I've read in the past few months about these two machines):
There are two main things, with possibly a third smaller thing, at play here: the PS4 has a raw spec advantage on paper and also has a simpler architecture, and it seems plausible that the PS4 currently has more mature development tools. Yea, I know Sony has done some customizations to the off-the-shelf components and added some co-processors, but everything I've read has said that the PS4 is more "off-the-shelf," while the Xbox One has undergone more customizing. That isn't to say that's a good thing for the Xbox One (it's a disadvantage right now, actually), it's just the reality from what I've read and seen.
The implications of these facts is that the PS4 is easier to get up and running, and it's easier to get things running at full power. The Xbox One will take more work to get there, but once it gets there, I believe it will be close to parity (at least to the point that differences are "minimal").
This is in line with everything that the developers have said, if you really think about it. I believe the developers in this article aren't lying, per se...but, they're not giving the complete picture. I think a lot of the stuff they're complaining about are at the moment due to Sony having better developer tools (which, honestly, boggles my mind...not sure how Sony managed to outdo MS there...MS REALLY dropped the ball there).
And as these consoles release and mature, these developer tools will improve. I believe eventually it'll be a non-issue. At the moment, there are definitely some growing pains, and we're seeing it in these quotes. But, I don't think this is representative of either console's output for the generation.
I believe what we're hearing out of people like Kojima will become the norm. He's been able to get the two in line with one another because he has put in the work and research to get there. These other developers (that people are quoting) are certainly probably not lying...but they're also REALLY over simplifying the comparison. And in the process they're being pretty unfair to the Xbox One and its potential.
So, why do I think there will be parity (or close to parity, minimal differences) once these systems are out and hitting their strides? Other than the fact that I'm thinking neither side is lying, I also simply think the Xbox One (based on what we know of the two consoles) has more room for optimization.* I'm not gonna say it's at PS3 levels in architectural differences (because it isn't), but in some ways the Xbox One will be the PS3 of this generation.
You can downplay some of the extra processors that the Xbox One has put in place, but I have a hunch that they will make a difference in the long run. The PS4's GPU will be doing a lot more secondary tasks (as described by Cerny himself) that the Xbox One's GPU probably will not have to do, and this is the kind of thing that gets glossed over in the raw specs.
The main reason I've read that Sony is choosing this route with the GPU is because of their decision to go with GGDR5 RAM, which has high latency. GPU's being parallel in nature are not as prone to issues with high latency RAM (as opposed to CPU's which are more prone to issues with high latency RAM), so using the GPU to do some more traditionally CPU-like tasks will help mitigate any latency issues.*
The downside of that is that the PS4's GPU will not be as free as the Xbox One's GPU to do graphical tasks in comparable situations. I don't think this means now that the Xbox One's GPU = PS4's GPU...rather, I just think it means that the gap isn't as big as the CU (which I think is where people are getting this 50% number from?) gap may lead people to believe.
*Like I said, I'm not a hardware specialist...I work in software and understand this stuff on a basic level. These are my thoughts based on what I've read, and what people in the industry are saying. Trying to be reasonable and use logic here, but please correct if anything seems drastically off.
And obviously, we can't be 100% certain about my conclusions because neither Sony or MS have released their full specs...but, based on everything we're hearing, I think my conclusions make a lot of sense. Occam's razor.
TLDR version: The PS4's potential and power is obvious. The Xbox One seems limited in power, but given the extra work, can really shine and possibly reach PS4 levels.
I work with numbers all day in my Bioinformatics/Biostatistics job, and I know just how much you can mislead with the wrong statistic. And it's quite easy to even sound like you know what you're talking about when doing so (people do it all of the time in Science)...I think anyone that is thinking it's a simple 50% difference is gonna find out the hard way once these games start coming out. You're gonna see differences, but honestly, they're going to be so small that only dumbass fanboys will care.
But this is article does bring up some interesting thoughts to my mind. Specifically, it got me thinking about a question: Why are there some developers saying that the machines are somewhat comparable, but yet we have this article?
We have people that have gone on record to say the differences are small/minimal or they're close to parity:
- Carmack: I know, he didn't specifically benchmark them himself, but I have to believe to officially go on record like that, he at least had someone on his team look at them and give him information to go on
- Kojima: essentially saying there are minimal differences
- NFS rivals developer: if you look at his quote, logically it sounds like he is saying 1) both machines are more powerful than they thought for a long time (probably due to developer tool improvements that are letting them get more out of each system), 2) The Xbox One is a lot more powerful than he's been lead to believe for a long time based on its paper specs (probably due to the greater potential for optimization due to ESRAM, the co-processors, and the other customizations MS put in place), and 3) that they will essentially be at parity, but the PS4 will stick up "a little" (a little != 50% difference...if there was really that big of a difference, he would not have said that)
So why is it we have these developers going on record saying one thing, but we have other developers saying another (ZOMG 50%!)? I don't think one side is lying and the other isn't...developers wouldn't go on record and say that. They have a lot to lose to say that kind of thing. I think there's more to this than meets the eye.
Here's my take (and I know guys, I'm not an expert. I'm just trying to stand back and make sense of the situation using some reasonable reasoning based on what I've read in the past few months about these two machines):
There are two main things, with possibly a third smaller thing, at play here: the PS4 has a raw spec advantage on paper and also has a simpler architecture, and it seems plausible that the PS4 currently has more mature development tools. Yea, I know Sony has done some customizations to the off-the-shelf components and added some co-processors, but everything I've read has said that the PS4 is more "off-the-shelf," while the Xbox One has undergone more customizing. That isn't to say that's a good thing for the Xbox One (it's a disadvantage right now, actually), it's just the reality from what I've read and seen.
The implications of these facts is that the PS4 is easier to get up and running, and it's easier to get things running at full power. The Xbox One will take more work to get there, but once it gets there, I believe it will be close to parity (at least to the point that differences are "minimal").
This is in line with everything that the developers have said, if you really think about it. I believe the developers in this article aren't lying, per se...but, they're not giving the complete picture. I think a lot of the stuff they're complaining about are at the moment due to Sony having better developer tools (which, honestly, boggles my mind...not sure how Sony managed to outdo MS there...MS REALLY dropped the ball there).
And as these consoles release and mature, these developer tools will improve. I believe eventually it'll be a non-issue. At the moment, there are definitely some growing pains, and we're seeing it in these quotes. But, I don't think this is representative of either console's output for the generation.
I believe what we're hearing out of people like Kojima will become the norm. He's been able to get the two in line with one another because he has put in the work and research to get there. These other developers (that people are quoting) are certainly probably not lying...but they're also REALLY over simplifying the comparison. And in the process they're being pretty unfair to the Xbox One and its potential.
So, why do I think there will be parity (or close to parity, minimal differences) once these systems are out and hitting their strides? Other than the fact that I'm thinking neither side is lying, I also simply think the Xbox One (based on what we know of the two consoles) has more room for optimization.* I'm not gonna say it's at PS3 levels in architectural differences (because it isn't), but in some ways the Xbox One will be the PS3 of this generation.
You can downplay some of the extra processors that the Xbox One has put in place, but I have a hunch that they will make a difference in the long run. The PS4's GPU will be doing a lot more secondary tasks (as described by Cerny himself) that the Xbox One's GPU probably will not have to do, and this is the kind of thing that gets glossed over in the raw specs.
The main reason I've read that Sony is choosing this route with the GPU is because of their decision to go with GGDR5 RAM, which has high latency. GPU's being parallel in nature are not as prone to issues with high latency RAM (as opposed to CPU's which are more prone to issues with high latency RAM), so using the GPU to do some more traditionally CPU-like tasks will help mitigate any latency issues.*
The downside of that is that the PS4's GPU will not be as free as the Xbox One's GPU to do graphical tasks in comparable situations. I don't think this means now that the Xbox One's GPU = PS4's GPU...rather, I just think it means that the gap isn't as big as the CU (which I think is where people are getting this 50% number from?) gap may lead people to believe.
*Like I said, I'm not a hardware specialist...I work in software and understand this stuff on a basic level. These are my thoughts based on what I've read, and what people in the industry are saying. Trying to be reasonable and use logic here, but please correct if anything seems drastically off.
And obviously, we can't be 100% certain about my conclusions because neither Sony or MS have released their full specs...but, based on everything we're hearing, I think my conclusions make a lot of sense. Occam's razor.
TLDR version: The PS4's potential and power is obvious. The Xbox One seems limited in power, but given the extra work, can really shine and possibly reach PS4 levels.
Crimson_Gold
Member
This says that the stories are true
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Realistically. What else could they say.
SolidSnakex
Member
I thought they were going to let the box on launch day do the talking?
jim-jam bongs
Member
That doesn't contradict the analysis as much as attempt to deflect it.
All just acting, bet he is a nice and calm guy.
Haha. Don't ever change, and don't ever leave. You are gold.
Are we still on denial or is this bargaining? Can't tell.
this has been the best "obvious fact twist" I have ever seen!
You know what "more powerful" means, you just trying to make this narrow definition more ambiguous in order to suit your needs.
by your MACRO definition of power: NES is more powerful than X1 because there is NO load time "snap feature".
see what I mean?
I feel like Microsoft have brought this on themselves. If they had just kept staying quiet about specs instead of trying to imply that the XBO is on par or even able to do more than PS4 then these devs probably wouldn't have been coming forward lately to comment on the actual power differences.