Support NeoGAF

[Ushae]

Too bad for you Microsoft.

You just lost Next Gen.

Like they lost last gen with slightly weaker hardware? Perfect GAF hyperbole, once again.

 

[abic]

So... the advertisement of power is more important, you mean.

He did not say that. Read again.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Like they lost last gen with slightly weaker hardware? Perfect GAF hyperbole, once again.

The differences on paper are a little bit larger this time.

And that's ignoring the plethora of other factors that coalesced making that generation that generation. Sony's missteps, the fairly genius marketing of MS "We're a companion to Wii!" and the end of exclusives.

 

[IonicSnake]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

 

[wsippel]

it's used to keep feeding the processors while using DDR3

http://majornelson.com/2013/05/21/xbox-one-architecture-panel/

I know what it's used for, and embedding memory certainly does make sense. But using that amount of SRAM doesn't. Unless the leaks were wrong and it is actually DRAM.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

It doesn't.

It's just an interesting bit of kismet that it works out that way.

 

[artist]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

I need to quote Y2Kev's post the second time;

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

 

[PdotMichael]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

People ignoring other way more important facts.

Like the PS2 (more powerful than the Dreamcast by the way) was the successor of the most succesful console ever, had a head start of 1 1/2 years, DVD support and it was cutting edge hardware in 2001.

 

[M°°nblade]

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

This post is great and needs to be quoted enough for future references.

With the arrival of next-gen consoles, I'm baffled by the amount of revisionism I've read in the past year.
I don't know if it's because these people never played games during that time or on that console or do they suffer from selective memory?
Saying that the PS2 wasn't more powerful than the dreamcast (right in this thread!) or Kameo not looking better than Xbox games are huge twists on reality imo.

 

[AniHawk]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

usually the most powerful hardware comes out later, and older systems are able to build up a library, drop the price, and build an audience while the powerful, newer consoles are just starting up.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

I generally agree with your post, but this single part I take issue with.

If you look at every gaming machine released in the past generation Non HD gaming was way ahead of HD gaming. 310 million odd units versus 160. You're talking about home consoles though. And in that you are more than right.

 

[AniHawk]

Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

i agree with pretty much everything you said, but there might be 200m hd machines when this gen is done. there are going to be about 335m non-hd machines.

edit: oh well that's strange.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

i agree with pretty much everything you said, but there might be 200m hd machines when this gen is done. there are going to be about 335m non-hd machines.

edit: oh well that's strange.

Dude.

Did we just do a Vulcan mind thingy?

 

[riflen]

It's clear from the design of the Xbox One that MS are quite happy to target joe-sixpack. They must believe there are better returns to be had. The Xbox One's price point will probably reflect this also.

I don't think they really care about Sony this time, except as far as making their titles look 'somewhat similar' in fidelity to the average person who plays games 2hrs a week. This is a box designed for the TV war that MS believes is coming with Apple and others.

 

[ramparter]

This is Nintendo's fault.

No it's actually consumers fault. There was never going to be an Xbox One,that's why there was no talk at all. Microsoft wanted to put all the gaming on Windows 8 along with Kinect.

But we kept asking for it so much, we couldn't accept the truth, we wanted more, never have enough, Microsoft had to respond. This is our monster, our creation.

Are we happy now?

 

[crazy_about_denise]

PS3 wasn't more powerful. CELL was, RSX wasn't.
You just can't simplify such things, well maybe next Gen you can because the Hardware is pretty much the same architecture / vendor.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Sounding like Sony last gen with their "unlocking the power of the CELL" argument. Which they did I guess when you see games like Uncharted 2/3 and GoW3.

But the Cell was inside the PS3, not 300 miles away in a data center hoping your broadband doesn't go down.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I don't want them to focus on graphics (IQ), I want them to focus on draw distance, frame rate, AI, physics, persistence, weather, etc.

I want more consistent worlds.

 

[MilesWebber]

Seems like each gen focuses on different tech. This gen was lighting and textures, the coming gen will be leaps in AI, engines and frameworks.

I'm okay with that.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

I feel like this whole time the xbox was just a 10 year effort by MS to make WebTV work. And now that theyre at the point where they may(or may not) get away with offering the minimum in the graphical department, they can now focus all their efforts on the 'tv experience.'

Ha, I didn't think I was the only one that thought of WebTV when first reading and hearing about Xbox One. Maybe times have changed to where it's viable, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[FlutterPuffs]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

Well,

 

[Y2Kev]

So... the advertisement of power is more important, you mean.

Yes and no. Consumers have historically seen through smoke and mirrors very quickly. The Jaguar is a very prominent example. Hell, the whole marketing campaign was "do the math." I guess somebody did the math.

I generally agree with your post, but this single part I take issue with.

If you look at every gaming machine released in the past generation Non HD gaming was way ahead of HD gaming. 310 million odd units versus 160. You're talking about home consoles though. And in that you are more than right.

i agree with pretty much everything you said, but there might be 200m hd machines when this gen is done. there are going to be about 335m non-hd machines.

edit: oh well that's strange.

Yeah, I didn't mean the handhelds, though obviously if you throw those in the numbers don't hold. I'm not sure of the DS' resolution but you might say sub-SD gaming won.

 

[kittoo]

It's clear from the design of the Xbox One that MS are quite happy to target joe-sixpack. They must believe there are better returns to be had. The Xbox One's price point will probably reflect this also.

I don't think they really care about Sony this time, except as far as making their titles look 'somewhat similar' in fidelity to the average person who plays games 2hrs a week. This is a box designed for the TV war that MS believes is coming with Apple and others.

And that's why I am glad that Sony is focusing on the gamer. Nintendo is doing God knows what these days, and hence it seems that only Sony is left actually truly caring about the core aspect- gaming! That's where my money is going to go.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Yeah, I didn't mean the handhelds, though obviously if you throw those in the numbers don't hold. I'm not sure of the DS' resolution but you might say sub-SD gaming won.

Actually... not unless you toss PSP into the SubSD category. Otherwise PS3/360 do come out ahead. Not by much though.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It became exceedingly clear prior to the reveal that Microsoft's overarching business goals were not to necessarily have the best "games box" but rather to try and capture the living room with an "all in one" box.

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

Fantastic post.

 

[SmokedMeat]

People saying the most powerful hardware never wins. Is it really because it was more powerful or because of something else? I don't think more powerful hardware automatically means last place.

Reasons for why one system may come out on top vary from generation to generation, but how powerful it is has nothing to do with it.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Yes and no. Consumers have historically seen through smoke and mirrors very quickly. The Jaguar is a very prominent example. Hell, the whole marketing campaign was "do the math." I guess somebody did the math.

Or they just looked at the awful game library completely devoid of all the big name games.

 

[FyreWulff]

Nintendo is doing God knows what these days

Last I checked, making games

 

[Prine]

Oh dear... if this is the case (will wait for e3) then its time to move over to Sony. Of all things, moving away from power is where i draw the line (Wii and WiiU are redundant consoles for me).

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Last I checked, making games

Just very very slowly.

 

[DragonNC]

In large part, yes. But Sony built the PS4's architecture from the ground up with the help of developers, making it tailor-made for efficient game development. The days of horror while developing for PS3 are almost over.

Exactly , I smell PS1 days are back .
All this years I was Xbox fun but hands down PS 4 will win this round with huge success.

 

[LittleJohnny]

How?


The new Xbox is still at least able to crunch out 4-5 times the ops/sec the Xbox 360 is, and with some 2-3x the work done per op as well.

Yep, the bottom line is Xbox ONE is more powerful than anything MS could have put out in 2010 or 2011. For 2013 the PS4 is placed better technically but as an upgrade to 360 it is still a huge leap in technology.

Just like 360 before it, I believe a lot of people will be underestimating what the system could do at the end of the day.

 

[Silly.Mikey]

Yep, the bottom line is Xbox ONE is more powerful than anything MS could have put out in 2010 or 2011. For 2013 the PS4 is placed better technically but as an upgrade to 360 it is still a huge leap in technology.

Just like 360 before it, I believe a lot of people will be underestimating what the system could do at the end of the day.

They already are. I guess DDR5 will apparently make games look like super next gen when compared to XOne, right? Cause that's the impression i get from all these comments.

In the end, I think E3 is going to be very critical for MS. Yesterday they talked about how they have 15 exclusives, 8 of those new IPs and yet showed only one, and that in a bs video...

The TV shit doesn't bother me cause i know that its just extra stuff (just like all of the apps) that Sony would love to have as well but just cant do it as well as MS can. So why not have it?

My problem is that they dont focus on the right stuff. Demo-ing apps and the new dash in front of a live audience is a good idea, its what people wanna see, so why the fuck are you not doing the same shit with your 15 exclusive games!!

When Sony do something, MS is always like "ahhh, just wait and see what we have" but then, we see nothing. How long must we wait to see MS? Next year maybe?

 

[segasonic]

Me being in Sony camp confirmed. Sorry I'm a slut for high-end stuff not for middle-ground compromises.

 

[Garbledina]

"We targeted it more as a broad entertainment play."

Pretty hard to hit target, apparently.

 

[Daingurse]

I saw Killzone 4 a few months ago and said damn, that's next gen.

Today I saw a cable box that needs 3 GB of ram alone just to operate. And I guess an HD version of CoD...finally.

It being a launch title and being built off an incomplete dev kit just makes it even more impressive.

 

[szaromir]

Me being in Sony camp confirmed. Sorry I'm a slut for high-end stuff not for middle-ground compromises.

Then you should be in the PC camp, PS4 is low- to mid-end at best.

 

[trmas]

Forza was showing replay video - they probably haven't cleaned the actual gameplay up enough to actually show it yet.

 

[soul creator]

power matters, but I think it matters to the extent that you just need to reach some kind of base minimum standard.

So, the Xbox One couldn't come out with Wii-U level graphics and be like "shit, power doesn't matter! It's about the gameplay yo!". But something like the GDDR5 vs. DDR3? Eh, we'll see. It's definitely an advantage for one system, but I don't think it's necessarily a gamechanger or anything.

Assuming 3rd party games aren't drastically underwhelming (I don't see "hey, this version doesn't have as much AA or AF as the other" as drastically underwhelming) it'll be "good enough". It'll have to differentiate itself with games and other unique features.

Ultimately, they'll both be black boxes with 8 core CPU's and 8GB of RAM (yeah I know, different amounts reserved for OS). So they'll both "look good". I'm curious to see how much of a difference there will actually be in practice, and not just on paper.

And of course, if someone is the type that really wants "no compromise" power, then get a PC

 

[Silly.Mikey]

Forza was showing replay video - they probably haven't cleaned the actual gameplay up enough to actually show it yet.

Nice, so 15 exclusive games coming out in the first year, and yet none of them are ready enough to be shown yet. This should end well.

Either MS is fucked or they will have the absolute most killer E3 in history. I honestly can't see there being a middle ground.

Absolutely. And considering the E3 conference will be about an hour with Xbox360 AND more XboxOne, (with TV!!!!) i cant imagine being blown away.

They need a miracle.

 

[jaypah]

Either MS is fucked or they will have the absolute most killer E3 in history. I honestly can't see there being a middle ground.

 

[seattle6418]

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

Thank you so much for this.

I'm glad to know i'm not the only one to think about this, because every time i see people posting that power doesn't matter it just makes me go nuts because it means that those people are either crazy, stupid or 12, so they haven't lived the past.

It's all about the context in which they launched, having a lot of power is the rule, the exception was the Wii, and like you said, even in this current gen more people chose HD systems.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Sad. Not only are the likes of J Allard, Otto Berkes, Kevin Bachus, Seamus Blackley, Ted Hase, Ed Fries, and Robbie Bach not with Microsoft/XBox anymore...it seems their pioneering spirit has left the division as well.

 

[commedieu]

Thank you so much for this.

I'm glad to know i'm not the only one to think about this, because every time i see people posting that power doesn't matter it just makes me go nuts because it means that those people are either crazy, stupid or 12, so they haven't lived the past.

It's all about the context in which they launched, having a lot of power is the rule, the exception was the Wii, and like you said, even in this current gen more people chose HD systems.

Its politics. It just matters what the base camp is saying. Now that MS seems slighted, Graphics don't matter or hardware power (Yet still claiming they will be better than the ps4 of course).

Same with blur ay, im shocked there wasn't a gigantic "TOLDYASO" over how much bluray was smeared and thrown under the table by MSnCo.

 

[RoadHazard]

PS3 wasn't more powerful. CELL was, RSX wasn't.
You just can't simplify such things, well maybe next Gen you can because the Hardware is pretty much the same architecture / vendor.

In terms of raw power the Cell + RSX most certainly were a more powerful duo than the 360's weaker CPU and stronger GPU, which is why the few devs who had the opportunity to really master the Cell were able to create games with visuals noticeably better than anything on the 360.

 

[bangai-o]

Me being in Sony camp confirmed. Sorry I'm a slut for high-end stuff not for middle-ground compromises.

then why you still on

Spoiler

lol

consoles?

 

[Slayer-33]

But wait.. Have the specs for the Xbox One GPU been confirmed at all?

 

[RyanReedyMusic]

Like they lost last gen with slightly weaker hardware? Perfect GAF hyperbole, once again.

Exactly. More powerful system does not mean instant win by any means. If anything we have learned this from WII. I get sick of gaffers hating and hating and they turn around and suck a games balls when its revealed and they like it.

 

[RoadHazard]

But wait.. Have the specs for the Xbox One GPU been confirmed at all?

Some of them have, from which people have been able to deduce that the leaks were spot on (12 CUs, 1.2 TF, etc).

 

[Silly.Mikey]

Some of them have, from which people have been able to deduce that the leaks were spot on (12 CUs, 1.2 TF, etc).

Ok, but what does this mean for the games? Until we see a game like Watch Dogs release and be compared side by side, this theoretical power doesnt say much.