Support NeoGAF

[IN&OUT]

It not being used on PC has absolutely nothing to do with how good or useful it would be. It isn't used on PC, no doubt because of what it would add to manufacturing complexity, transistor count and cost.

The EDRAM in the Xbox 360, for example, provided more than just extra bandwidth. It allowed some developers to get away with using less external memory bandwidth than would have otherwise been required without it. ESRAM on the Xbox One, thanks to its close proximity to the execution units of the GPU, no matter how many times people try to deny it, will help the Xbox One in a similar way. It will help with more than simply just giving the system some extra memory bandwidth. It will help reduce the bandwidth cost of most post processing algorithms. In fact, with fast enough on chip memory, they can become completely free of external memory bandwidth.

http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1738762&postcount=3325



And, for the record, this isn't a stupid vs post. It's simply to showcase, with added evidence from an actual game developer, that the "all you're getting from esram is extra mem bandwidth" argument is false. Who cares what's used on the PC. We are talking about what's used on consoles, and how that may benefit the consoles. The if it was any good, it would be used on the PC argument is the weakest possible argument anyone could even attempt to bring into this discussion. That said, are you going to say this game developer has no idea what he's talking about regarding fast on chip memories such as what's used in the Xbox One as ESRAM?

eDRAM can look beneficial in previous generation, it was used in 360 and PS2, but you know why?

because devs at the time were stuck at slow DDR2/DDR3 RAMs. today eSRAM have almost no benefit compared to GDDR5. also eSRAM in X1 doesn't have large bandwidth at all, if it was using a huge bus and running @ 1000gb/s I would agree that it would hold an advantage to GDDR5 used in PS4, but sadly it's not.

 

[MrPresident]

Onion+ bus.

That diagram says that it shares the Onion bus. Being able to bypass caches is not the same as having full blown 10GB/s worth of additional bandwidth.

 

[avaya]

That diagram says that it shares the Onion bus. Being able to bypass caches is not the same as having full blown 10GB/s worth of additional bandwidth.

Fair point.

 

[ElTorro]

That diagram says that it shares the Onion bus. Being able to bypass caches is not the same as having full blown 10GB/s worth of additional bandwidth.

Onion and Onion+ share the same bus and, hence, the same bandwidth. Onion(+), however, adds an additional 10GB/s bandwidth to the 20GB/s of the CPU bus, which is not to be confused with Onion(+), resulting in a total of 30GB/s of cache-coherent bandwidth.

 

[MrPresident]

Onion and Onion+ share the same bus and, hence, the same bandwidth. Onion(+), however, adds an additional 10GB/s bandwidth to the 20GB/s of the CPU bus, which is not to be confused with Onion(+), resulting in a total of 30GB/s of cache-coherent bandwidth.

Care to elaborate a bit? The diagram does state explicitly that CPU bus bandwidth remains at < 20GB/s.

I'm sure that it has its uses and that it exists for a reason but I don't see how it changes anything with regard to overall CPU bus bandwidth.

 

[nib95]

At Quakcon,Carmak said OpenGL is 10times faster.
http://youtu.be/Uooh0Y9fC_M?t=1h15m14s

Than Direct X, not PSSL.


EDIT: And yea, that doesn't sound right at all. I've heard devs say OpenGL is better than Direct X, but 10x faster does not sound plausible.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I don't see why "getting away with using less external memory bandwidth" is any different from providing "extra bandwidth". Operations on render targets in eDRAM require less external bandwidth because all the necessary information (pixelbuffers) is stored in eDRAM. Hence, all the necessary bandwidth for those operations is provided by the eDRAM. There is no need to access main memory because the necessary data just isn't stored there. That does, however, not change the total amount of memory bandwidth consumed by those operations. The only thing that changes is the distribution of bandwidth consumption on two busses and two memory pools.

That in itself is a substantial benefit compared to a system with a single pool of slow memory, because the total bandwidth is higher, but it is not a benefit compared to a system with a single pool of fast memory, because there the total bandwidth is not higher, yet you have less flexibility, since only small amounts of data fit into the fast, embedded pool of memory.

Going by that post, you're able to get away with using a lot less external memory bandwidth, which I view as an extra benefit on top of simply providing more raw memory bandwidth. But even if we were unable to agree on that point, he said fast on chip memory, thanks to close proximity to the execution units, benefits from being lower latency.

most post processing algorithms become completely free of external memory bandwidth. Examples: HDR bloom, lens flares/streaks, bokeh/DOF, motion blur (per pixel motion vectors), SSAO/SSDO, post AA filters, color correction, etc, etc. The screen space local reflection (SSLR) algorithm (in Killzone Shadow Fall) would benefit the most from fast on chip local memory, since tracing those secondary rays from the min/max quadtree acceleration structure has quite an incoherent memory access pattern. Incoherent accesses are latency sensitive (lots of cache misses) and the on chip memories tend to have smaller latencies (of course it's implementation specific, but that is usually true, since the memory is closer to the execution units

He's clearly saying that fast on chip memory is something that benefits most post processing algorithms, even the one used in Killzone Shadow Fall). And if a fast on chip memory can help to such a great deal for important post processing algorithms, making them less of a drain on the system's overall memory bandwidth than would normally be the case without that fast on chip memory, then isn't having it a very helpful added value to the graphics sub-system of the console as a whole? That sounds like it's saving the GPU's power to work on other things, because the ESRAM has removed a good deal of the burden (burden being external memory bandwidth).

And keep in mind, I'm not comparing to however things may work for the PS4, I'm just saying that this looks like a pretty solid and workable design for the Xbox One if developers are able to make very effective use of it.

eDRAM can look beneficial in previous generation, it was used in 360 and PS2, but you know why?

because devs at the time were stuck at slow DDR2/DDR3 RAMs. today eSRAM have almost no benefit compared to GDDR5. also eSRAM in X1 doesn't have large bandwidth at all, if it was using a huge bus and running @ 1000gb/s I would agree that it would hold an advantage to GDDR5 used in PS4, but sadly it's not.

That's where you're mistaken. I'm NOT saying it holds any advantage to GDDR5 used in the PS4. I'm not even comparing with the PS4. I'm saying that this is very advantageous and helpful to the Xbox One. And the ESRAM in the Xbox One does have a pretty big bus. It's on a 1024 bit bus. I'm aware that you also said 1000GB/s, which it doesn't have. But you get the point I'm making.

 

[astraycat]

At Quakcon,Carmak said OpenGL is 10times faster.
http://youtu.be/Uooh0Y9fC_M?t=1h15m14s

He didn't say it was 10 times faster.

He says it's being used to render 10 times more triangles, as in, all the triangles that are being rendered by every device right at this moment due to the much much broader use of OpenGL in devices like mobile and browsers.

He did not say that using OpenGL over DirectX will net you 10x speed boost. That would be absurd.

 

[MrPresident]

DirectX and OpenGL apply to PC flamewars and not console ones.

PS4/X1 having variants of these APIs is in no way relevant because neither system will be constrained by its API of choice. Their software layers are slim enough as is and anyone claiming that API differences will matter is thinking with his penis.

 

[ElTorro]

Going by that post, you're able to get away with using a lot less external memory bandwidth, which I view as an extra benefit on top of simply providing more raw memory bandwidth.

There is no "on top of that". External memory bandwidth is in itself nothing special or qualitatively different and, hence, more precious than any other memory bandwidth. It is just the bandwidth between the processor and main memory. It is only then precious if all other bandwidth is connected to a small and, hence, less flexible pool of memory. But leaving that aside for a moment, your bandwidth is just the total sum of connection between processor and any memory. In general, it does not matter how fragmented the bandwidth is between one or many different memory pools.

In practice, this fragmentation becomes a problem when pools are not large enough to hold data that you want to store in a somewhat physically coherent way, like all textures necessary to draw frames in the current scene.

"External bandwidth" only begins to exist as a concept when you introduce an embedded memory pool. Otherwise, you would just have plain "bandwidth". It becomes precious because bandwidth to the embedded pool is in comparison inherently less valuable since the capacity of that pool is substantially limited.

Saying that eSRAM helps in saving "external bandwidth" and that it is therefore a benefit compared to a system without eSRAM, is like saying that crutches are a benefit over a person with healthy feet because they take away weight on unhealthy feet.

On the latency topic, I would still like to have actual numbers, since all claimed latency benefits so far have been explicitly speculative.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

There is no "on top of that". External memory bandwidth is in itself nothing special or qualitatively different and, hence, more precious than any other memory bandwidth. It is just the bandwidth between the processor and main memory. It is only then precious if all other bandwidth is connected to a small and, hence, less flexible pool of memory. But leaving that aside for a moment, your bandwidth is just the total sum of connection between processor and any memory. In general, it does not matter how fragmented the bandwidth is between one or many different memory pools.

In practice, this fragmentation becomes a problem when pools are not large enough to hold data that you want to store in a somewhat physically coherent way, like all textures necessary to draw frames in the current scene.

"External bandwidth" only begins to exist as a concept when you introduce an embedded memory pool. Otherwise, you would just have plain "bandwidth". It becomes precious because bandwidth to the embedded pool is in comparison inherently less valuable since the capacity of that pool is substantially limited.

Saying that eSRAM helps in saving "external bandwidth" and that it is therefore a benefit compared to a system without eSRAM, is like saying that crutches are a benefit over a person with healthy feet because they take away weight on unhealthy feet.

On the latency topic, I would still like to have actual numbers, since all claimed latency benefits so far have been explicitly speculative.

Alright, since that crutches analogy was a bit too clever, I'm going to now call ESRAM a Gundam.

But I'm saying it's a nice design for the system, regardless of how or why certain things were put in, or how it compares to the PS4's setup.

 

[Finalizer]

Saying that eSRAM helps in saving "external bandwidth" and that it is therefore a benefit compared to a system without eSRAM, is like saying that crutches are a benefit over a person with healthy feet because they take away weight on unhealthy feet.

Beau'iful.

 

[buenoblue]

The makers off Titanfall said they can save 10% CPU power by not having to run the host server on the console.

 

[Garrett 2U]

The makers off Titanfall said they can save 10% CPU power by not having to run the host server on the console.

That's a believable scenario. External servers can be used to offload some processes.
How often Xbox One developers use the available cloud power is TBD, but so far devs seem to be using the cloud for multiplayer servers which is an awesome upgrade from last gen and will free up some resources for those games.

 

[boredandlazy]

The makers off Titanfall said they can save 10% CPU power by not having to run the host server on the console.

That'd be the same for any game using dedicated servers though, wouldn't it? Even games that use them on the PS4?

 

[RoboPlato]

That'd be the same for any game using dedicated servers though, wouldn't it? Even games that use them on the PS4?

Yeah. It's not a new thing.

 

[Garrett 2U]

That'd be the same for any game using dedicated servers though, wouldn't it? Even games that use them on the PS4?

Yeah for sure

 

[BrokenEchelon]

EA, Activision and co. will develop for the lowest common denominator, as is always done (with the exception of the Wii).

I think the difference will be the same as last gen w/ the PS2/Xbox, just flipped.

 

[Skeff]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

An expert has entered the building, please evacuate and take all your opinions with you.

 

[buenoblue]

Yeah sure, it's just a relevant point in evaluating these machines. If x1 does have dedicated servers for all games surely this is good. No more host advantage on cod or FIFA would be a better advantage than a graphics upgrade for me all day long. Yeah ps4 is more powerfull sure, but x1 is still a significant upgrade over current gen.

 

[Chobel]

Yeah sure, it's just a relevant point in evaluating these machines. If x1 does have dedicated servers for all games surely this is good. No more host advantage on cod or FIFA would be a better advantage than a graphics upgrade for me all day long. Yeah ps4 is more powerfull sure, but x1 is still a significant upgrade over current gen.

Do you purposely ignore all what is said in this thread? There is no such thing as "all xbox one games will have dedicated servers".

Saying that eSRAM helps in saving "external bandwidth" and that it is therefore a benefit compared to a system without eSRAM, is like saying that crutches are a benefit over a person with healthy feet because they take away weight on unhealthy feet.

Brilliant analogy.

 

[cyberheater]

We're just over 2 months from launch. When are we going to start to see some multi plat media. I'm looking forward to seeing a massive banquet for some folks with crow followed by crow.

 

[Domino792]

An expert has entered the building, please evacuate and take all your opinions with you.

Is skeff a expert or are you being sarcastic. because if he is then damn i cant wait to compare these multiplats.

 

[Skeff]

An expert has entered the building, please evacuate and take all your opinions with you.

Thank you, I actually do consider myself to be well informed on this subject due to my understanding of the hardware and experience creating games.

This thread has not been about opinions, it has occasionally been about technical discusion but mainly about FUD which has been comprehensivly disproven. there are a lot of posts in this thread that give a rather poor image of neogaf.

 

[overconfidence]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

Bravo.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

People bought PS3, I'm sure folk will cope.

 

[AdmiralPain]

I think the difference between the PS4 and the XB1 will be much smaller than people think. outside of a couple of graphical effects and possibly a more stable frame rate, there won't be much difference.

 

[Skeff]

People bought PS3, I'm sure folk will cope.

Yep, its as if I specifically listed other reasons to buy xb1, because there are reasons to buy it, but equal multiplats will not be a reason to buy it.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

Saved
Will revisit this post in a few months.

 

[Nozem]

I might just as well add my uninformed prediction, not hindered in any way by any actual technical knowledge:

With same graphics and resolution:
PS4: solid 30 fps
X1: 25-30 fps

With same framerate and graphics:
PS4: 1920x1080
X1: 1280x1080 upscaled to 1920x1080

With same resolution and framerate:
PS4: ultra graphics
X1: high graphics

 

[Skeff]

Saved
Will revisit this post in a few months.

No need if I'm wrong i'll serve up my own crow. By noticable to us I mean resolution and framerate in particular.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

No need if I'm wrong i'll serve up my own crow.

Given your post, I highly doubt that's going to happen

 

[SMZC]

Saved
Will revisit this post in a few months.

Even if the launch titles for both systems have the same performance, that doesn't mean he's wrong.

We will undoubtedly see a difference between the huge majority (if not all) of multiplatform games. For starters, we've already heard of developers who are claiming that one version is performing better than the other. Also, never has it happened before in videogame history where performance wasn't better in one way or another in the more powerful systems. Whether small or big, the differences will be there. This will be true even if developers do end up developing primarily for the "lowest common denominator".

 

[TechnicPuppet]

Yep, its as if I specifically listed other reasons to buy xb1, because there are reasons to buy it, but equal multiplats will not be a reason to buy it.

Of course some could also be better if the online infrastructure is better.

Or MS could mess up the cloud, Sony bring their own thing and they beat them there as well.

 

[soulassssns]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

Lmao, thank you I needed a good laugh.

 

[TheKayle]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

have you any proof or is just free talking?

you cant be serious


ps. likely most of multiplats games this gen will go also on pcs (seen the similarity with the architectures)..and is that the place where you should play it..if u want a true next gen feeling

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I might just as well add my uninformed prediction, not hindered in any way by any actual technical knowledge:

With same graphics and resolution:
PS4: solid 30 fps
X1: 25-30 fps

With same framerate and graphics:
PS4: 1920x1080
X1: 1280x1080 upscaled to 1920x1080

With same resolution and framerate:
PS4: ultra graphics
X1: high graphics

I am also unburdened with actual actual technical knowledge. Nice feeling isn't it.

 

[TheKayle]

We're just over 2 months from launch. When are we going to start to see some multi plat media. I'm looking forward to seeing a massive banquet for some folks with crow followed by crow.

and the dessert?

 

[level44]

Theres some top notch fudging in this thread, going to be a lot of dissapointed xbox fans in this thread come november so i'll say a few things now:

There are a lot of reasons to buy an xbox one, If you like kinect games, if you just can't live without XBLG, if you want to try and use voice recognitions and you have a well supported accent, if you want to play xbox one true exclusives like Halo and Forza, that's all fine, go grab yourself an xbox one.

But if you want the best or as good as the competition in mutiplat titles, then you're in for a bad time. The titles will be noticeably superior on the PS4. or at least noticeable to us.

Please be honest with yourselfs and don't buy an xbox one thinking your getting multiplatform games as good as the PS4. If you still want an xbox one get one.

Well said. There are going to be some very unhappy xbox fans when the evidence is revealed. It seems like a lot of them on here are living in a dream world.

 

[BrokenEchelon]

People have said it before, but the first Digital Foundry comparison is going to be a fucking graveyard.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

the city scene in killzone is not being rendered in realtime, as in you couldn't jump out before your allowed and run around. it's a trick to give the impression of scale, there are no other game elements ie aI, realtime shadows etc. I'd be surprised if it wasn't just a ingame engine cutscene segwayed into actual gameplay, like you know what they did on the last 2 killzones and the uncharted games. if they could render a city in such fidelity in realtime why would they have the actual gameplay in such a closed off banal tiny space? hmm I wonder.

Why on earth would you want to jump out and run around before the level started?

Also: SEGWAY.

 

[FeiRR]

the city scene in killzone is not being rendered in realtime, as in you couldn't jump out before your allowed and run around. it's a trick to give the impression of scale, there are no other game elements ie aI, realtime shadows etc. I'd be surprised if it wasn't just a ingame engine cutscene segwayed into actual gameplay, like you know what they did on the last 2 killzones and the uncharted games. if they could render a city in such fidelity in realtime why would they have the actual gameplay in such a closed off banal tiny space? hmm I wonder.

 

[Vizzeh]

Maybe X1 Are not including the memory bandwidth overhead? Where as PS4 is. If their similar CPU's then its surely illustrated differently or its design choice. (IE 20GB including overhead vs 30GB total excluding overhead)

or the X1 MAY need that extra bandwidth to do other tasks at the same time that the PS4 simply does not need, IE background CPU tasks, kinect/OS etc - pure speculation ofc - Eitherway I suspect CPU bandwidth is not going to make games look much different considering most of the tasks including GPGPU etc will be done on the Graphics cards, of which we know where the advantage is.

 

[orioto]

I would just like to add, for fair fight sake. Everyone is always assuming the strengh of one console or the other will be used to the max and it's some kind of mathematic problem.

But you know well port are random. Sometimes different teams, different budget, skills...
I'm sure we'll see at some point a better version of a game on xbo, and it'll be just cause the dev fucked up badly.

That and look at launch. Performances of games at the beginning of a gen are extremely disparate, from miraculous to inexplicably bad, for both consoles.

 

[plagiarize]

I love how people in this thread talk about one version 'maybe just' having a more stable framerate like that's nothing.

 

[ElTorro]

Care to elaborate a bit? The diagram does state explicitly that CPU bus bandwidth remains at < 20GB/s.

Talking of a total cache-coherent bandwidth of 30GB/s does not mean that individual clients can saturate that bandwidth on their own. The CPU has a maximum bandwidth of (<) 20GB/s to main memory. The GPU has a maximum bandwidth to main memory of 10GB/s when using the Onion(+) busses. Those busses are all cache-coherent with respect to the CPU caches. In combination, they can consume a total of 30GB/s of total cache-coherent bandwidth while the individual bandwidth limits are lower.

/edit: The figure is ambiguous, however. The CPU bus figure could to represent not a single physical bus but the category "CPU bus" of which there should be two instances, one for every Jaguar compute module, leading to a total cache-coherent bandwidth of ~50GB/s. It could also just mean that every individual compute module can consume 20GB/s but that the total sum of concurrently available bandwidth for both CPUs is capped at 20GB/s nevertheless.

The leaked documents are just not precise enough. When comparing the PS4 figure with the XB1 figure, the XB1 also has a figure of 20,8GB/s for each individual Jaguar compute module, which aligns nicely with the PS4 figures, indicating that the CPU bus bandwidth is valid for individual compute modules, which makes sense, since each module has its own but mutually coherent cache hierarchy.

 

[yarden24]

Given your post, I highly doubt that's going to happen

ok, then can we assume from your post that you will eat crow if he is right?

 

[dark10x]

the city scene in killzone is not being rendered in realtime, as in you couldn't jump out before your allowed and run around. it's a trick to give the impression of scale, there are no other game elements ie aI, realtime shadows etc. I'd be surprised if it wasn't just a ingame engine cutscene segwayed into actual gameplay, like you know what they did on the last 2 killzones and the uncharted games. if they could render a city in such fidelity in realtime why would they have the actual gameplay in such a closed off banal tiny space? hmm I wonder.

One of the most ignorant posts I've seen in a while...

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

ok, then can we assume from your post that you will eat crow if he is right?

Sure.