Both platform holders are, of course, encouraging developers to take advantage of each console’s unique features (the DualShock 4’s touch pad and Kinect, for example) but there’s little enthusiasm for either among the developers we spoke to. “They really want us to make use of platform specific stuff to give their version a leg up over the other,” said one source. “But unless there’s a good design reason or incentive we rarely do.”
It's always good to see that (some) developers aren't willing to shoehorn in platform-specific features that aren't worthwhile. Seems like they'd just end up being a waste of development time!
“Xbox One is weaker and it’s a pain to use its ESRAM,”
Somehow I think at first the differnce between the 2 will be large in favor of PS4..."Another described Xbox One’s graphics drivers less charitably as “horrible”."
so...
PS4:
~50% lead on memory reads.
~50% lead on ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit)'s.
....without optimisation for either console:
PS4 1920x1080 ~30fps
Xb1 1600x900 ~20 fps
Somehow I think at first the differnce between the 2 will be large in favor of PS4...
MS will have to lower the prices of their consol to be closer to the PS4 for sales.
The fact that your paying more for something that performs less, is gonna be a turnoff for alot of people.
i havent used consoles in ages, so is there really going to be a backlash if xbox games arent 1080p? is anyone really demanding/expecting 1080@30 or 60 hz?
i havent used consoles in ages, so is there really going to be a backlash if xbox games arent 1080p? is anyone really demanding/expecting 1080@30 or 60 hz?
possibily but only in the part of the userbase that even know what the difference is. people assumed next gen would be able to render 1080/60 and will be mad if thats not the case. TBH 720/60 is fine and better vs 1080/30
There's also nothing really stopping Sony from bumping up the CPU clocks to match the Xbone. Seems all MS did was just overclock them instead of replacing the chip entirely.
From what I understand, the CPU that MS is using is capable of 2GHz, so they weren't actually overclocking them per se, they were seeing good yields and figured they could easily cool them, so they bumped up the speed, still under what they're capable of.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that is the case.
If you read a couple of internet gaming forums you would think there will be major backlash but outside of those few hundred people, nobody really cares. The vast majority of people will gloss over when you tell them what resolution and frame rate a game runs at. If it's GTA or Madden or Call of Duty, they don't care, they're just going to play the game.
I don't think there's going to be any noticeable difference between the two, at least not at first. Most early games will be direct ports. So far, it seems developers do prefer the PS4. However, that doesn't matter. What does is how much of a carrot Microsoft and Sony are willing to offer to make their console the primary development platform. If MS is simply offering more funding, the Xbox One will suddenly become the greatest thing since sliced bread. Sony has a pretty big stable of in house developers, so they're not as reliant on third parties. The same can't be said for Microsoft. You can bet that they're they're sending cupcakes, beer, and sacks of cash to every publisher on the planet to convince them to go green.
That said, the difference between the Xbox One and PS4 is cut and dry, unlike the last generation. Yes, the PS3 had a faster CPU than the 360, and arguably a slightly faster GPU. However, nobody knew how to optimize for its exotic hardware. This time both systems use an identical platform. The Xbox One has a faster CPU but the PS4 has a faster GPU and significantly faster memory. There's also nothing really stopping Sony from bumping up the CPU clocks to match the Xbone. Seems all MS did was just overclock them instead of replacing the chip entirely.
i havent used consoles in ages, so is there really going to be a backlash if xbox games arent 1080p? is anyone really demanding/expecting 1080@30 or 60 hz?
When looking at games side by side and one at 1080p and one at say 720p it will be noticeably sharper on 1080p. Not that 720p will look bad, but the crispness is ever so slightly not there.
I think it looks real bad if Microsoft's new console still can't handle full HD.
I think it looks real bad if Microsoft's new console still can't handle full HD.
There is no such thing as full HD. That was a made up marketing term to sell 1080p.
When looking at games side by side and one at 1080p and one at say 720p it will be noticeably sharper on 1080p. Not that 720p will look bad, but the crispness is ever so slightly not there.
What you say is true in the first paragraph but thus far every developer interviewed says that Sony is doing it right and made sure the tools, hardware, and software were designed with developers in mind. I've read reports and watched video interviews and they all seem to indicate that it's really easy to work with Sony for the PS4. So if this continues and Sony keeps offering top tier support, there could be a number of teams that work on the PS4 first because if your support sucks and you can't get things working what's the point of taking the cash if it will end up costing you development time in the end? There is work to be done for both platforms anyway, neither is locked in with the development software.
As for the second paragraph, nobody has said the PS4 CPU is slower...in fact everything seems to indicate it is in fact faster too because the CPU and GPU are on one APU. Nobody overclocked, they are running them below their proposed specifications from AMD. If you took that CPU and put it in a PC it would be at a higher clock speed than the consoles are running.
So, Sony is catching up to MS in developer support.
That has always been a strong point in MS's portfolio, regardless of what people like Blow and Fish have to say.
No, MS has always been hostile to developers. There is no catching up, Sony has always been more friendly to developers.
sony hardware has typically been harder to program for
Full HD = 1080p. You "marketing term" argument is pointless since all these terms are made to push units.
Why do you think people starting tagging "HD" to everything?
"HD", "Full HD", "Ultra HD", "4k display"...these are all ways to market to consumers. I agree that using numbers is always better.
That said, it is pretty sad if the next gen can't do 1080p. 720p is looking pretty haggard these days.
No, MS has always been hostile to developers. There is no catching up, Sony has always been more friendly to developers.