Exactly what I was going to sayQuote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Guess the developers don't want to feel restricted or limited in regards, but it makes sense to add since cost vs what you would gain is favor of the latter.
Printable View
Exactly what I was going to sayQuote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Guess the developers don't want to feel restricted or limited in regards, but it makes sense to add since cost vs what you would gain is favor of the latter.
That's exactly why I think both Sony and Microsoft are going for a lot of RAM regardless of whether the rumors are true or not. The biggest limiting factor in the current consoles was the RAM. The 360 has 512MB and I'm pretty sure the PS3 had only 256MB of RAM (don't remember for sure). You could really see that in later games and it was always present with the PS3 and it's horrible slowdown with the in game XMB.Quote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
I guess they finally realized that there's no point in taking the risk of the RAM potentially being a bottleneck when they can just load up on as much as they want because of how cheap of a solution it is.
Yep spot on and it would be ridiculous to have such a small thing in both cost and implementation be the reason for suffering performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
The XMB issue was and still is terrible.
I'm not disagreeing with the cost analysis. I simply don't buy that MS can have ZERO XB1s manufactured now 4 months out from launch. I don't see anyway possible they could just ramp up the assembly line and start cranking out all of the XB1s needed to even come close to meet demand. It's a time issue more than a cost/technology issue.
Oh I agree with that as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Just saying IF production hasn't already started...which I know it has already begun.
Perhaps that's where the rumors of production troubles started and it's not production troubles, but rather they haven't started production yet because they haven't nailed down the final specs yet. Considering Sony has 3 times the number of consoles available, it's definitely possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Besides, they ALREADY can't meet demand. The stores around me have been sold out of the Xbox One for weeks.
This is still 100% rumors at this point, but it does make a little bit of sense.
Well let's presume it's all true. It's still playing into Sony hands (IF Sony can meet demand). If Sony has really sold out of 3x the supply and they can increase production the final 4 months to meet additional demand due to no XB1s X% will UNDOUBTEDLY just get a PS4 instead of waiting for XB1 to be available.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
The question is how high does X% get. If true, you could be looking at a super-majority world-wide and a clear majority in the US with PS4s.
I don't see how it's playing into Sony's hands. The Xbox 360 launched a full year ahead of the PS3 with a $200 cheaper pricetag and a much better catalog of games. They started off amazingly well and were way ahead of Sony. Look at the numbers now. The PS3 did WAY more things wrong than the Xbox One is doing and it ended up doing just as well as the 360 because no one cares about how the launch is, but rather how well it's supported throughout it's life cycle. You're putting entirely way too much weight into the launches of these things.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
But, back on topic, the Xbox One already sold out once and retailers were allotted more after a few weeks. It's impossible to predict how these things are going to fare in their first few weeks because there's too much unknown at this point. If they both can meet their respective demands, they're both going to sell extremely well.
I have no doubt in my mind that if Microsoft wanted to change the specs on the One, especially something like the RAM or increasing the power of the GPU, they'd still have plenty of time to do so. Whether or not they do, I don't know...I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
This of course begs the question: Why change specs when "they don't matter"? (or whatever the quote was when asked why PS4 was more powerful)
Future proof, maybe. They have 8GB of RAM, but 3GB of that is going to be reserved for the OS, so developers are left with 5GB of RAM to work with. That's plenty for now, but a few extra GBs might add a little insurance to make sure the RAM isn't eventually a bottleneck, like it was for the 360 and the PS3.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Like I said, it doesn't really matter in the end. Games on both consoles are going to look virtually the same, and PS4 exclusives will look a tad bit better. Optimizing the GPU and adding more RAM isn't going to change that. It's going to be a carbon copy rehash of this gen.
Nope specs are "meaningless" according to Xbox Exec. Sounds like they are getting a spec "pump" or "implant" if you ask me. :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
So you're going to listen to an executive who probably a. has no working knowledge of how any of the stuff works, and b. probably didn't even work on the console? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Of course specs matter. Only an idiot would say otherwise. When the specs are as close as what the One and PS4 are going to be, then no, the DIFFERENCE likely wont matter, but of course specs matter in general.
Yeah hoped that wasn't true that specs don't matter but couldn't up with a funny comment lol
Because its just hilarious for that to be said in the electronics world.
If that's the case I need to trade one of my inferior spec computers for a high end one straight up to Dell lol
That is what he said. Course if they bump it up to where they have more than Sony, well then let's talk specs will be the position. Point is when you are inferior in regards to specs, "specs are meaningless":DQuote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
lmao wow!
That almost needs to be a meme
Maybe what he meant was that specs aren't everything lol
Which in some cases you could have the best looking technical specifications with cheap parts, implementation, whatever and it be out performed by a counterpart with less glamorous specs I guess.
However to say that they are "meaningless" I don't believe is true lol
The only ones making a big deal about it are die hard Sony supporters. For the record, he clarified rather quickly afterwards in a post:
As I said before, he's dead right. Games on both consoles are going to look extremely similar.Quote:
I appreciate those who understand the point I was trying to get across. It’s always hard, after sitting doing interviews all day, and you’re trying to have an engaging conversation with someone, and words get pulled out our the tone what you’re trying to say didn’t come out how you meant it.
You should also understand this interview was done after our launch event, and prior to E3. So please take that into consideration.
I’m not diminishing Sony’s performance claims and I wasn’t trying to be arrogant or dismissive. What I was trying to say is – I’m not Sony’s engineering team. So I can’t comment on what they have published as specs. I know what our teams are doing, and I know how they thought about architecting the system. The guys who are building these machines (on both sides) are unbelievably talented and experts in their field. Nobody knows the specifics of how the machines are architected or if there may be bottlenecks in one system or accelerators in another that change the impact of the published specs.
What I believe is that our games are going to be great and they are going to look next-gen, and I *think* E3 sort of showed that. And great games are what matters. And while you guys joke about the cloud stuff, I think the stuff the Respawn guys have said starts to clear up what we’ve been talking about with cloud performance (cue the “have you seen Titanfall” meme)
Games on both systems looked awesome. I was there, and while I know RISE took a hit on the gameplay that was shown, I thought it was the most next-gen looking game I saw on either platform. Of course, I get I’m biased and I didn’t have time to see everything.
As always, I love taking the hits. And I appreciate that while the words I used may were probably worth some scrutiny, I do appreciate that some of you got what I was trying to say.
(BTW the picture in that article is not me, but it is my good looking friend Kevin who works in Marketing)
There's a HUGE difference between 5 gigs of RAM and 8 gigs of RAM and while the games themselves may look graphically similar, I GUARANTEE you that framerates will take a hit if they don't do some form of optimization on the XBONE to run within the 5 gig limitation.
I'm not a die hard Sony supporter FYI. I'd LOL at anyone who said that.
Sure I've eventually had Sony ever since the PS came out, but first next-gen console I had was a 360.
In fact the only reason I eventually got a PS3 1-2 years later was because I had 3...yes 3 xbox 360's fail on me during my time of owning. I actually got a 4th but decided to trade it in before the thing failed and eventually got a PS3. I didn't have any intentions on getting a PS3 due to the cost, unless they dropped in price at the time.
That PS3 that I got at the time didn't start having issues until last year when I replaced it in September. So got 5 years out of it. Whereas in a year's time I owned 4 xbox 360's...
Yeah specs are "meaningless"
In IOU's world non MS homer = Sony homer :DQuote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
Most of the Xbox One games at E3 were running at a constant 60FPS while most of the PS4 games were running at 30FPS. Name one game right now that actually uses 5GB of RAM. Good luck. Like I said, it's overkill because right now, there's virtually none that use that much RAM. The difference is going to lie with the GPU. The one Sony is using is definitely more powerful, but it's not more powerful in the sense that they're going to have hugely better looking games. It would probably come right down to some games being able to run at a full 1080p with full effects on the PS4, while the Xbox One version would have be run a 900p to achieve full effects. Would anyone be able to tell the difference? I know I sure couldn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I didn't mean you. Hell, I didn't even mean CLW. I don't consider anyone on here one of the die hard Sony supporters I was talking about. CLW might be a little one sided, but I truly believe that he's just having fun and doesn't take this stuff that seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
I was referring to the idiots that I read on various gaming sites who take this shit completely out of context and act like these "console wars" are the most important thing in the world.
Figured you weren't just wanted to air my still frustration to do this day about my 360 experience lolQuote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
To this day I still have my memory card (that I had to get NCAA rosters back then) and the hard drive that came with one of the systems that I still have Feeding Frenzy and this putt putt Golf game my wife and I use to love :D. I was throwing away some of my old electronics stuff I had laying around and found the card and the hard drive. I'd like to get another 360 just haven't yet. Did enjoy while it worked.
:D Yeah, I take every chance I get to vent about my consoles breaking down. I didn't have a 360 break down until last year. I had a launch console for 4 or 5 years and never had a problem. Sold it and got a slim and of course, the stupid thing breaks just a few months ago. I figured that they had been good to me, so I just got another.Quote:
Originally Posted by skipwondah33
The PS3, on the other hand, has been nothing but a pain in my ass (and if anyone on the planet deserves to hate Sony, it's me). Launch console broke after a year and a week. They wouldn't honor it even being so close to the 1 year. I got another one which lasted about 2 years or so before breaking. I got a slim, which also broke after a year and a week or two. Again, they wouldn't honor it. I got another slim, which ended up breaking AGAIN. Now, I'm on a super slim and while it feels like it's a flimsy piece of garbage, it's holding up just fine. Throw in the fact that my account was compromised and it took them 3 years to figure it out and finally release my account back to me and the fact that my barely one year old Vita broke a month or two ago and this generation has been nothing but a pain in the ass when it comes to Sony. Yet, here I am with my 5th(?) PS3 and my 2nd Vita. Not bad for a raging Microsoft fan boy. :D
Like I said, I don't think anyone here is a true Sony die hard. I know most people here prefer it, and CLW REALLY lets it shine through sometimes, but I think it's all in good fun. The comments I read around various sites on the internet, however, are genuine, and literally make me lose hope in mankind every time I read them. First of all, I don't understand why the hell they care so much (unless they have invested in Microsoft's or Sony's stock) and secondly, I don't understand why it's such a big deal if so and so prefers Sony, while the other so and so prefers Microsoft. I don't get the hate around Nintendo, either. Don't like them? Don't buy it. I guess I just don't understand the internet mentality of it. :D
Talking about games running at E3 is pointless. The last thing that's EVER done is optimization to make things run faster, smoother, etc. Also, besides a few games, most everything was ran on high end PCs (aka 8+ gigs of RAM).Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Clearly you don't understand how RAM works when it comes to games. RAM effects load speeds, ability to bare the weight of the frames on the screen without overflow, and, in general, how smooth of an experience you're going to have.
Pointing at any game that's also coming out for one of this generations consoles is pointless as well because, obviously, they aren't going to be programming the game to take advantage of what the extra RAM will allow.
As for games that use that much RAM, Crysis 3 (with high end recommendation of 8 gigs of RAM) would like to say hello.
A little one sided. :smh: CLW is always FAIR AND BALANCED! :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
PS4 v. XB1 is the 2nd most important/serious thing in my life (behind only Conservatives v. Commies). :nod:
I figured rastahs for first :deadhorse:Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
It's a God given right to pursue RASTASHS so that falls 3rd.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
It's irrelevant whether it's optimized or not. If they already have the games running at 60FPS, which is their target, why would they add a bunch of effects that would knock them off that goal? A little common sense says they wont. Titanfall is one of those at 60FPS which already has a bunch of effects added in. "Hey guys, you know what would be awesome? Let's add a bunch of useless shit so that we can't hit the 60FPS goal." Yeah, I don't think that will happen. I realize it was on high end PCs, but several of those games were confirmed to be hitting 60FPS on Xbox One hardware, Titanfall and Forza being the 2 that immediately jump to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
How is it pointless to compare a PC game to what we'll have with next gen hardware? The lone difference is that games wont have to fight with the OS for memory and other resources. When that next gen hardware comes out, it still wont be up to snuff on the really high end PCs, so I'd say that's the perfect thing to compare it to.
As for Crysis 3, I run it at 1080p with 6GB of RAM and a nice 40FPS, so no, you don't need 8GB of RAM to run it. I haven't checked it, but I'd say it's using 4 or 5, which would put it in line with what the Xbox One would be able to do. As with all Crytek games, it sure as hell isn't as optimized as it could be, either.
I've also never heard of RAM having a vast impact on FPS. It handles things like loading the world, loading textures, and other things like that, but it doesn't have much of an impact at all with a game's FPS and how smoothly it runs.
The Commies don't think you deserve any rights, so back to that 1st most important thing. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
You've clearly never played Minecraft with only 512mbs or 1 gig of RAM allocated. Frames drop when massive loads hit the processor instead of the RAM. Hell, Minecraft still has the occasional frame dip on the 10 gigs of RAM I have allocated to it sometimes. More RAM is a HUGE deal. Loading new items into memory means loading textures, frames, etc into the RAM so that the CPU and video card can process the movement, physics, and other changes made to the objects being loaded. Without the proper amount of RAM, you have frame hiccups as the processor attempts to loads the new items from scratch instead of pulling them from the RAM like normal. Thus, without the proper amount of RAM (or optimization in the sense of cutting down on the graphical quality in one area or another), you have less frames per second being put on the screen at a time and a chunkier looking experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
It's amazing to me that developers were able to do what they've done on this generation of consoles with only 256mbs (PS3) or 512mbs (360) of RAM. The amount of workarounds and lack of visual depth some games had to do to keep even 30 FPS is amazing to look at (look at a video comparing GTAIV on a high end PC compared to the 360 version for instance to see the STARK differences between the two) and, sadly, most people won't even notice the things that they are doing with the new hardware because, graphically, we've hit the peak of what can be done within the human eye spectrum. This generation is going to be about the amount of things on the screen at once, since they've hit the wall with how graphically impressive they can make things look.
Also, eww to playing a FPS at only 40 fps. I feel bad for ya.
I'm not arguing any of that. I'm just saying that RAM doesn't play a huge role in frames per second (or at least, not nearly as much as the CPU and GPU do) and I believe that 5GB is more than enough when it's 100% solely used for the game and probably will be for the entirety of this upcoming generation. I've yet to find a game on PC I couldn't run at 1080p at over 30FPS with less than 5GB of RAM being used. The only reason I'm that low on FPS is because of the GPU I have, which is weaker than the ones in the PS4 and the One.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
But, like I said before, it's better to have more RAM so that it's not a bottleneck like it was this generation. Like you said, it's impressive what developers were able to do with outrageously low RAM these current systems have.
Xbox One is an 'entirely justifiable' business expense, says Microsoft
http://www.polygon.com/2013/7/11/451...says-microsoft
Gamers Can't Handle the New Female Head at Xbox
http://news.yahoo.com/gamers-cant-handle-female-head-xbox-161250957.html
Allot of irrelevant arguments are getting over shadowed by one relevant argument that she isn't a gamer and has no gaming industry experience to lead XB1 into the future of gaming. Interesting....
(shrugs)Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Everyone has to start somewhere.
That's not even relevant. Don Mattrick was a gamer and look at all the stupid shit he did. As long as Phil Spencer and Aaron Greenburg are there, I have confidence they'll continue to have good games. If both of them ever leave, then we might have a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
So if you 180 from a 180 does that mean its the XBox360 again? Inquiring minds want to know.....
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/...x-one-policies
No, the 180 they already did made it a 360 version 2.0, which is pretty much what the Xbox One is right now. If they were to go back on their policies (they wont), then it'll be the Xbox One again.
By the way, I signed that petition a few days ago. I'm fine if they leave things the way they are, but I'd love to have the option to have the family share plan, instant game swapping, and automatic installs to the hard drive. Happy to see it reached 15,000 signatures.
I hope they do just so we can see Sony's youtube video response. It would be EPIC. :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
They've already made a change at the whim of it's consumers. They really shouldn't do it again, even if it is to go back to their original plan.
Meh turned out o.k. for this guy:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingpin32
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esUTn6L0UDU
Oh yeah and if you think Big Brother won't be listening/watching to you on Kinect:
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/07/11...grams-detailed