|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
AndyPandy Puschel
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
5
   |
Posted - 2013.05.21 13:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Orenji Jiji wrote:
Sony and Microsoft going with x86 is just a money-grab move. Perhaps they've finally learned reg. bleeding money on hardware production and want to limit the spill these days. But I know one thing -- this was driven by accountants, not by engineers.
U seem to have a little misconception here, so let me ask u: Given a 250$ hardware budget and the problems developers had with the "strange" PS3/PSU architecture, what hardware would u use in your nextGen console? This means how u get the most bang for the buck?
I would either pick ARM smart-phone hardware or ofc older PC hardware, u need to get as much "useable" performance as u can get, so picking PC hardware was the obvious choice. Given our currently increasing AAA title budget, its much more important to get a easy to develop console out, instead of some "funky" theoretically MFLOPS stats using some strange and obscure hardware architecture.
U also seem to forget that the hardware we will be able to buy, will probably be still subsidized at first, so no u wont be able to build a similar performing PC given the same budget, so i wont call this "money-grabing". I also don't understand whats so bad on a affordable, easy to use gaming console? Simply don't believe the marketing, ofc a console cant compete with current high end PC's, how could they given the budget?
Remember u don't pay 1000$ for a console. |
AndyPandy Puschel
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 14:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sparadok wrote:Heres hoping ps4 is backwards compatible rthen we can have best of both worlds cos if not it might be bye bye dust.
Um, sorry to tell u this but no PS4 wont be "fully" backwards compatible as noted in many articles and by Sony itself:
http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2013/04/sony_thought_long_and_hard_over_ps4s_lack_of_backward_compatibility
I mean realistically they switch to a totally different hardware platform with the PS4, it would be really costly and difficult to attain backwards compatibility, but i also agree with sony that the move to x86 is much more promising than restricting some hardware aspects via compatibility for the first 1 year.
On the bright side, u might be"lucky" and given either some extra money spend or probably PSN+ u might be able to "stream" some old PS2/3 games via Gaikai, similar to what OnLive did. http://www.gamesradar.com/ps4-backward-compatibility-explained/ |
AndyPandy Puschel
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 14:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Orenji Jiji wrote:So it will be just dumbed down PC -- what was the point of the console then? Exclusive games? Boot lock? DRM chip? I only care about one of these things and now I could just play them on gaming PC, right? I mean the game will be for x86 architecture and PC GPU, just locked to play on a single box? Seems logical.
As I said above -- I don't play on PC anymore. I will get a PS4. I'm just having problems with rationalizing this against cutom built HTPC that could run the same stuff without a hitch.
I'm not hating, just losing faith. ;-)
What was the point than last console generation? At the time Xbox360/PS3 hit the market all your above points are as valid as they are now? U always could get and play the same none exclusive console games on PC, while some PC only games always looked better.
The reason is the same as before: A console is a affordable, low maintenance, easy to use gaming "BOX", that can be used "out of the box" from your couch on the big screen. The new consoles may add TV and Internet capabilities, but this just shortens the gap to a PC.
Sure someone may argue, "But the steambox will change this all", but the SteamBox still comes with linux pre-installed, which given the current Linux games is no alternative to tinker with it and install windows on it, which is by no means a "out of the box" experience u get on consoles.
So u need to ask yourself, why did u care for any console last generation?
On the bright side, see how things unfold from the developer perspective. Mid-size to small PC only developers are now able to get extra profit, by allowing the easy and cheap ports to both consoles. This is huge!
On top of that console developers now have a much easier time to create games for all platforms, since its basically the same architecture without any obscure hardware differences like PS3/SPU or IBM in-order CPU's. Even better console developers have the best conditions ever, to create good games. 5-7GB "usable" 64bit Ram/CPU makes things so much easier, compared to the last gen of consoles.
All this means more profit for game developers, while allowing faster and streamlined development processes. This means better and more diverse games on all platforms, since a PC only dev can now aim much higher, if he also can get a console version out. Indy devs now also can target consoles, since only minimal special knowledge is needed, hence u probably might not even need to buy a DevKit, since the CPU/GPU is so similar to what a PC has.
I think both mayor consoles going for "normal" x86 CPU's and standard GPU's, is the best thing that could happen for both PC and console gamers! |
AndyPandy Puschel
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 15:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Surt gods end wrote:EVE players will play it. But why on earth would any FPS player on PC play this over "TRIBES", "PLANETSIDE 2" "ARMA 3" or the next FPS only PC game?
Um well just my own crazy, wild theory, but maybe because Dust is not exactly like "TRIBES", "PLANETSIDE 2" "ARMA 3" ?
Why would anyone "on earth" play ARMA 3 or DayZ over "Tribes"? Why would anyone play CoD4 over Planetside 2?
Reformulating your own question to make my point: " But why on earth would any FPS player on Xbox360 play MW3 over Battlefield 3 or the next FPS only Xbox360 game?
I guess your point was, that given to lower technically and overall FPS experience compared to games that cost 10 times more money, it would sound logical to never pickup Dust if u own a PC or a other console? This would be a valid point if Dust would be a exact copy of any particular game, but obviously it is not.
The main effect the lower quality has are the much lower sales figures, but since the experience differs from the mentioned FPS games on other platforms, anyone can test out Dust and see if he/she likes this experience or not. |
AndyPandy Puschel
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 16:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
matsumoto yuichi san wrote:not sure if you all realize the effect the main memory being GDDR5 will be for the ps4, that's going to keep it competitive substantially longer than you think
So going by your "Expert" opinion, Microsoft by not choosing GDDR5 willingly choose to not aim for a longer life-cycle? Fair enough, could be that they want to refresh there console more often than Sony.
What i think is more plausible and backed up by most PC benchmarks in the last 10 years, is that raw memory speed plays only a minor role if it comes to games. Direct main memory access is still bloody slow, compared to cache L0-3 access speed, thats why u still need to make sure your working set stays in cache memory or u need to hide the memory latency.
So i pick larger or faster cache anytime over faster main memory.
Quote:
the cpu may be slower, and the gpu may not crunch as well, but cutting into those times for loading and memory tansfer can make that seem much faster :)
No it does not "make that seem much faster", first of memory speed plays no role at all for loading times. The ability to swap in a SDD, larger RAM or the dedicated texture compress/decompress chips on the XBoxOne does play a role in loading times.
If the CPU/GPU is too slow for a certain calculation, u cant make up with it by faster main memory access, most shader texture latency/access is hidden by overlapping them with other texture access and doing none dependent calculations in between. Most complex shaders can hide most texture accesses very well, if at all memory speed plays a role for faster postprocess or defered AA shaders.
Sony seemed to put more faith into investing those extra 15$ into faster memory, while XboxOne put there bet on a more expansive Kinect and several dedicated extra chips that helps with decoding/encoding and there TV capability.
In the end those 15$ more wont make a huge difference on the long run or otherwise Microsoft engineers would be doing a pretty bad job, don't u think? |
|
|
| |
|