Not trolling I recall reading an article indicating a headset would be included with XB1 but perhaps it was mis-reported and perhaps I'm dreaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
Printable View
Not trolling I recall reading an article indicating a headset would be included with XB1 but perhaps it was mis-reported and perhaps I'm dreaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
FWIW, I thought the Xbox One was going to come with a headset as well, so the recent 'no headset' news was a surprise. However, there's been so many rumors about this console for so long, it's tough to actually know what will be included.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Good riddance. That thing that was included with the 360 was the biggest piece of garbage ever.
Guys guys at least the mix was free. I never had to buy thanks to it being included. I'm glad Sony is including one.
Amen. I hate using this damn thing when talking with friends in party chat, but haven't dropped the money on a real headset, and at this point I won't until I get upgraded to Xbox One and know the good headsets will plug in and work with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Xbox 360 Headsets May Work With Xbox One
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/27/xbox-360-headsets-may-work-with-xbox-one
Xbox Exec: Comparing Console Specs Is 'Meaningless'
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/...is-meaningless
Isn't that what all dudes with "spec issues" say? :nod:
He has a point, but he sounds like a pretentious ass hat with the way he said it.
I think that's MS' actual strategy. Act like pretentious asses is the way to win the console war. Funny thing, that almost never works.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
I thought their standard retort was that they "know how to use it", which is what that M$ guy was doing. LOL! ;)Quote:
Isn't that what all dudes with "spec issues" say?
precisely. saying something is irrelevant when someone else is touting it is an ADMISSION that your measurement in the "irrelevant" category of comparison aren't up to the "bragger's" stuff. :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
Yep. To OU's point and the M$ guy's point, the specs *may* not be as cut and dry as Sony is touting...........there have been many times I've encountered how computer specs and benchmarks reveal how a competitor's product doesn't stack up to what my products my company provides, but they are marketing it a certain way that makes their product look dominant. Corner cases that they PROACTIVELY hone in on and then boast and get the market/customer to buy into, and then attack a competitive product for not matching up despite that competitive product being more capable and dominating them in all other areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Regardless, Marketing dept at M$ is getting killed and heads should be rolling. I think they have the money to hire some better people. ;)
RAM in One Much Faster than Originally Stated, Rumors of Down Clocking Debunked
Good to hear that no production issues are present. I know Smooth was potentially worried about that, so those worries can be put to rest.Quote:
Well-placed development sources have told Digital Foundry that the ESRAM embedded memory within the Xbox One processor is considerably more capable than Microsoft envisaged during pre-production of the console, with data throughput levels up to 88 per cent higher in the final hardware.
Bandwidth is at a premium in the Xbox One owing to the slower DDR3 memory employed in the console, which does not compare favourably to the 8GB unified pool of GDDR5 in the PlayStation 4. The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible.
So how could Microsoft's own internal tech teams have underestimated the capabilities of its own hardware by such a wide margin? Well, according to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s. It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writing simultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations. Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4).
The news doesn't quite square with previous rumours suggesting that fabrication issues with the ESRAM component of the Xbox One processor had actually resulted in a downclock for the GPU, reducing its overall capabilities and widening the gulf between graphical components of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4. While none of our sources are privy to any production woes Microsoft may or may not be experiencing with its processor, they are making actual Xbox One titles and have not been informed of any hit to performance brought on by production challenges. To the best of their knowledge, 800MHz remains the clock speed of the graphics component of the processor, and the main CPU is operating at the target 1.6GHz. In both respects, this represents parity with the PlayStation 4.
In terms of what this all means with regards multi-platform titles launching on both next-gen consoles, our information suggests that developers may be playing things rather conservatively for launch titles while dev tools are still being worked on. This is apparently more of an issue with Xbox One, where Microsoft developers are still in the process of bringing home very significant increases in performance from one release of the XDK development environment to the next. Our principal source suggests that performance targets are being set by game-makers and that the drivers should catch up with those targets sooner rather than later. Bearing in mind the stuttering performance we saw from some Xbox One titles at E3 such as Crytek's Ryse (amongst others), this is clearly good news.
Our information suggests that Microsoft's strategy with the Xbox One operating system and supporting software is to implement all the features first and then to aggressively pursue optimisation - a process that is ongoing and will continue beyond launch. As the performance levels of both next-gen consoles are something of a moving target at the moment, differences in multi-platform games may not become evident until developers are working with more mature tools and libraries. At that point it's possible that we may see ambitious titles operating at a lower resolution on Xbox One compared to the PlayStation 4.
However, clearly it's still early days, and right now these machines remain very much uncharted territory - even for those who've been working with prototype hardware for a long time. Microsoft tells developers that the ESRAM is designed for high-bandwidth graphics elements like shadowmaps, lightmaps, depth targets and render targets. But in a world where Killzone: Shadow Fall is utilising 800MB for render targets alone, how difficult will it be for developers to work with just 32MB of fast memory for similar functions? On the flipside, Xbox One's powerful custom audio hardware - dubbed SHAPE (Scalable Hardware Audio Processing Engine) - should do a fantastic job for HD surround, a task that sucks up lots of CPU time on current-gen console. How does PS4 compare there? And just how much impact does the GDDR5 memory - great for graphics - have on CPU tasks compared to Xbox One's lower-latency DDR3?
While next generation of consoles finally arrive in a matter of months, the launch games will have mostly been developed on incomplete hardware - a state of affairs that was blatantly obvious from titles seen so far. On paper, Sony retains a clear specs advantage, but it was difficult to see that reflected in the quality of the games at E3. Based on what we're hearing about the approach to next-gen development, it could be quite some time before any on-paper advantage translates into an appreciably better experience on-screen.
Unless full theoretical power is achieved, the PS4's RAM is still going to be faster, but it's using GDDR5, so that's to be expected. Sony's GPU is a good bit more powerful as well (last I heard, it had a 50% power advantage over the chip in the One). The processor in both of them are virtually the same.
Like the article says, you'll probably eventually see differences between the graphics capability, but it'll be years before we do and even then, it wont be a major difference (for example, a PS4 game may be able to go 1080p 60 frames per second and the same game on Xbox One might be at 60 frames per second and only 900p...no one would be able to tell the difference).
Good to hear the production problems aren't true.
Actually, now that I've re-read it, those numbers don't add up to me. If the eSRAM was theoretically capable of 102.4 GB/s with single read/write operations, then it would theoretically be capable of 204.8 GB/s if the read/write functions are simultaneous, not 192 GB/s like the article states. Something doesn't jive there.
Always be wary of any article that appeals to "sources" that are unnamed. That article does so twice.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Well, I get the numbers now, but using their final theoretical speed of 192 GB/s, it would mean that they DID down clock the speed of the GPU from 800 MHz to 750 MHz. If that's the case, then you'd have 750MHz*128, which equates to 96 GB/s for a single read/write function. Since it's reportedly capable of doing both simultaneously, you'd multiply that by 2, which does give you the 192 GB/s that the article stated was possible.
So, at least one of those things in the article is wrong. It either didn't get down clocked like the article stated but is actually theoretically capable of 204.8 GB/s, or it did get down clocked to 750MHz and is capable of the 192 GB/s read/write speed. It'll be interesting to find out which one it is.
WOOOO! BEST FEATURE EVA! That's it Sony CANCELLING my ps4 pre-order NOW! :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
A whole lot of love for Titanfall in E3 awards.
http://www.gamecriticsawards.com/winners.html
Quote:
Best of Show
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Original Game
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, XBox 360, Xbox One)
Best Console Game
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Handheld/Mobile Game
Tearaway
(Media Molecule/SCEA for PSVita)
Best PC Game
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Hardware/Peripheral
Oculus Rift
(Oculus VR)
Best Action Game
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Action/Adventure Game
Watch Dogs
(Ubisoft Montreal/Ubisoft for PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Wii-U)
Best Role Playing Game
The Elder Scrolls Online
(Zenimax Online/Bethesda Softworks for PC, PS4, Xbox One)
Best Racing Game
Need for Speed: Rivals
(Ghost Games/EA for PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Sports Game
NHL 14
(EA Canada/EA Sports for PS3, Xbox 360)
Best Strategy Game
Total War: Rome II
(Creative Assembly/Sega for PC)
Best Social/Casual Game
Fantasia: Music Evolved
(Harmonix/Disney Interactive for Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Online Multiplayer
Titanfall
(Respawn/EA for PC, Xbox 360, Xbox One)
Best Downloadable Game
Transistor
(Supergiant Games for PC, PS4)
It was by far the best looking game out of any of the conferences, so that's not surprising.
:smh:
People complain about Call of Duty but then suck the dick of the first game that's Call of Duty with "mechs".
:smh:
It literally looks absolutely nothing like Call of Duty (unless your only criteria is that it's a FPS, in which case, every FPS is Call of Duty).
It's made by the people that used to make Call of Duty and NUMEROUS places have said that it plays exactly like Call of Duty. :fp:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Okay, how is that a bad thing? As far as gun play, Call of Duty has some of the tightest you can play. It also has easily the best controls and the fluidity of the combat is second to none. It gets ragged on for one thing and one thing only - horrific net code. The recent ones have had imbalanced weapons and poor map design, but that's been after the departure of those 2.
So it's a game that's has combat and gun play that is as fluid and tight as Call of Duty, but it's on dedicated servers? Yeah, I'll take that all day. I really don't see how that's a bad thing. :D
Because Call of Duty is like reading a "FPS For Dummies" book. It's the lowest common denominator of FPS. It's the Madden of FPSs (same old shit with SMALL changes each time) and yet people keep buying it, just like Madden because they're fuckin' sheep that can't put their money where their mouth is and demand a GOOD FPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
It's pretty fuckin' sad when F2P FPSs are better in every sense than Call of Duty has EVER been.
No argument there, but this isn't Call of Duty. Never mind the fact that it's a sci-fi shooter with operable mechs, but it's going to have completely different mechanics. The fact that the shooting feels like Call of Duty is only a good thing because that's one of the very few things that Call of Duty gets right (and 60 FPS).Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
Considering this broke the record for most E3 awards, I'm quite confident this will be more than a good FPS. I called that as soon as I saw it and I've yet to see anything that would lead me to believe otherwise. The lack of a campaign is kind of disappointing, but honestly, if it's going to be as horrible as the Call of Duty and Battlefield campaigns, it's probably best to do without and focus on making online the best that it can be.
Facebook ad fail :D :D :D
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s...g?t=1372866404
:D
Microsoft Details Xbox One's Reputation System
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/...utation-system
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Well there goes my rep I am a tea bagging machine to the cheesy players on battlefield 3 just to piss them off. :D
:D Yeah, I'm cool until the douchebags start up in the middle of a game. When they do, I start giving it right back to them as bad as they hand it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26
Hopefully the system works as well as they want it to. Then I can actually play games without dealing with fucktards in them.
A friend of mine that works at GS informed me today that as of earlier in the week, GS stores nationwide are no longer taking reservations for the Xbox One Day One Edition or any other edition. I have another friend that works at a Best Buy and he told me that it's a similar situation there, as they cut off all Xbox One orders July 5th and would not be allowing more until they can confirm more inventory.
Obviously, this is a double edged sword for Microsoft. It's just proof that it's going to do extremely well out of the gates, which is usually a good omen for a console. On the flip side, they're losing out on a TON of potential money by being behind in the manufacturing process. At least, that's what I'm assuming is the problem. I guess Sony could just be allowing infinite orders and they plan on fulfilling them in waves over several weeks and Microsoft doesn't want to do that, but I'd say the more likely issue is that Microsoft reportedly started much later and wont be able to match Sony's manufacturing numbers. I guess time will tell.
Either way, people will be stomping the hell out of each other in Walmart this black Friday for both systems.
I pre-ordered NCAA yesterday at a local Gamestop. Talked to the guy a bit as it was just me and him in the store and he was hesitant to tell me at 1st but eventually he said that although they haven't sold out of XB1s they were close but PS4 was out pacing them by far. MS is behind on at least telling retailers how many units they will get. He also said the PS4 was selling like hot cakes. Both are going to be popular but he said he didn't think there would be a supply issue for PS4 until at least black friday (then all bets are off).Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
:fp:Quote:
Don Mattrick may have left Microsoft to take up the role of CEO at Zynga as of today, but it appears his interest in the company isn't anything new.
Bloomberg reports that Mattrick actually tried to buy the social game developer while he was still working for Microsoft back in 2010. Supposedly, Mattrick was keen to strengthen Xbox's lineup with social games from Zynga that were, at the time, adding millions of users to Facebook every week.
Though negotiations eventually fell apart, the process caused Mattrick to become friends with the former Zynga CEO Mark Pincus, who he's replacing this week. It seems the two kept in contact, even going road-biking together, before starting to discuss Mattrick's move in March of this year.
So it looks like Mattrick's departure from Microsoft had been in the offing for a while, and wasn't a reaction to the backlash over the Xbox One's policies. The article goes on to reshare the pay and perks he'll be receiving during his first year at Zynga, which could see him earn around $19 million in his first year alone.
Xbox is so much better off without this pompous ass.
From the same insider who correctly leaked the specs of the consoles early:
SourceQuote:
As rumors are continually made about a change in the final specs on the Xbox One we have now heard rumors from a member on the website Beyond3D that Microsoft is actually asking developers about an increased GPU upclock and a increase in total DDR3 RAM to 12GB.
Plus, I did say it was a rumour so neither the upclock or RAM increase are confirmed. And it’s not just that the veracity of the rumour isn’t confirmed, but that the rumour itself does not claim MS are definitely increasing the clocks or RAM.
Apparently, the story apparently is that MS has gone to devs for feedback on a few different things, two of them being an increased GPU clock and an increase to 12 GB of RAM (another thing on the list was storage for ‘tombstoning’ - I’m guessing flash cache)
Devs have to list which spec changes they prefer in order of importance. So nothing is confirmed as of yet, just options MS is getting feedback on.
However, I do have someone else telling me (also from a dev source) that we shouldn’t be surprised to see 12GB of RAM in the final box and that it isn’t as hard for MS to do as we think.
This is not the only rumblings that the final hardware specs are still up in the air for the Xbox One apparently Engadget was able to get a inside look at Xbox One development a few days before the Xbox reveal which is around the same time beta devkits were sent out. In the picture above you'll notice many variations of hardware design leading to the idea that these might also contain different variations on internals that are still being tested even days before the reveal.
The chamber is full of hundreds of variations of prototype Xbox hardware — today, it’s set to very cold — and is vital in determining how the Xbox One stands up to extreme thermal conditions. With laughs all around, he’s freed from the icy, zebra-filled prison. Surprising no one, the various beta kits of the console itself, the controller and the new Kinect all sport zebra-pattern tape to hide their shape (as rumored).
— Engadget.com
It is all still speculation but the fact that we are getting information from good sources that the final specs of this device are still up in the air is a good sign that we still know little about what will ultimatley end up being inside our Xbox One's at launch.
As of right now current Xbox One devkits are running with 12 GB of RAM and the reason for the idea behind a upclock is that the Xbox One is running cooler or using less power than was planned and they can now allow for a stable upclock. This is only speculation on why this rumor could end up being true and backing up what the insider sources have said, as a reminder the Xbox 360 originally was being built with 256 MB of RAM but late in the development Microsoft decided to use the 512 MB of RAM from devkits.
For those who want the short story, Microsoft considering upgrading to 12GB of RAM and increasing the power of the graphics chip. Nothing confirmed yet, but they're just asking developers what they think about it.
If they don't know what the console is going to have as far as hardware goes 4 months out they are in BIG trouble. There is no way they can ramp up production enough to meet even the "weaker" demand than PS4 in that time with such a late change. Unless they want to delay the console and allow Sony free reign during the holiday season.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Entire system architecture? Yeah. RAM? No. Upgrading the RAM wouldn't be something that would delay the console at all (in fact, they did the exact same thing with the 360 at about the same timetable). As for the GPU, it's not like they would be changing the chip, they would just be upclocking it for higher speeds, so that wouldn't take extraordinary amounts of time, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
If the rumors are true, then yes, they still have time to do so.
Personally, I don't see the point to upgrading the RAM. I don't know of any games that require more than 6GB of RAM and that's in a PC environment where the OS is hogging some of the RAM as well. Having 7+GB of RAM dedicated solely to games is just overkill, IMO.
Why charge the same for more power. At this point changing the game this much doesn't really make sense to MS considering the general consumer isn't going to know or care.
Developers. A bunch of them were complaining about only having 5GB of RAM available for games to run (again, I really don't know why because that should be plenty in most cases). Besides, price shouldn't have anything to do with it. DDR3 RAM is extremely cheap and adding another 4GB would cost them virtually nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
In 2005, just a few months before the release of the 360, Microsoft upped the RAM from 256MB to 512MB, so they've done it before. It doesn't really make sense to me this time around, but eh, time will tell.