Playstation 4 Or Xbox One? (See mod warning in the first post)

runawaybishop wrote: »

Was this time spent developing xbox one games? The criteria have changed significantly from 360 development. 360 had no review by MS.

I don't really follow your argument any more to be honest, you seem to be using the terms quality and stability interchangeably. In one post you mentioned memory leaks as a quality check, in the quoted one you mention them as stability.

So, i reiterate: Quality checks in this instance specifically mean quality, not stability, as there are separate stability tests. I'm not sure why you are linking Nintendo's exclusivity clause with Microsoft's ability to refuse a games inclusion to the platform because of poor quality. They are totally unrelated.

^^ what is the confusion about this?

Generally, (this was for Wii, 360, PS3 era) stability would refer to checks making sure that the game would not crash the console, it often involved leaving the game running over a 48-72 hour period (I think Sony and Nintendo were 72 and MS was 48) and seeing if it crashed. Quality checks were looking for text breaking out of UI elements, visual glitches and stuff like that. This involved a team playing through the game and trying to create reproducable bugs.

runawaybishop wrote: »

360 had no review by MS.

For XBLIG. They definitely had the same thing in place for marketplace and physical retail games. Even if MS weren't directly doing it I'm sure they had a contractor that was properly monitored and audited.

COYVB

Maragenie wrote: »

€400 - €500 euro for a yoke that is struggling 30fps on 1080p is daylight robbery for a product that's supposed stand the test of time for the next 7 years.

To be fair, the PS3 pulled up no trees in its first few years either, and that turned out alright. Not saying for one minute that things will turn out like that, but when you've got an unknown in there like the eSRAM (or the cell architecture for PS3) it's impossible to call

Maragenie

The PS4 is simply a mid range PC mate, nothing more and nothing less which is running X86 just like any regular PC. I see your point with the PS3 but that same "unknown" rule doesn't apply because X86 is already fully developed and understood.

Little bird told me aswell that because of the similarities between the new gen consoles and the PC that emulators should start popping up as soon as next year. Time will tell I guess.

The CPU is similar but the XBox One GPU is very different as is the Memory set up of both consoles. As for emulation appearing as early as next year, sure it will. Emulating machines is made easier when architecture is similar but it's the timing issues between components that makes it extremely difficult and when you are dealing with multi core CPU's and GPU's then you have a total nightmare for an emulation coder. Look how long it took the Saturn to be emulated and that had two CPU's and two video controllers and the ridiculous amount of power it requires to run compared to other emulators.

WillyFXP

Maragenie wrote: »

The PS4 is simply a mid range PC mate, nothing more and nothing less which is running X86 just like any regular PC. I see your point with the PS3 but that same "unknown" rule doesn't apply because X86 is already fully developed and understood.

Little bird told me aswell that because of the similarities between the new gen consoles and the PC that emulators should start popping up as soon as next year. Time will tell I guess.

Regular PCs run x64 these days.

Grayditch

If someone doesn't care to play any of the multitude of exclusives the consoles have, don't have a bunch of friends all playing exclusively on consoles or would miss that, or if they don't care about the remote play features of the PS4 or Wii-U, ... they should get a PC for gaming.

Not everyone buying a console is oblivious to how great a hi spec PC can be, though. Some people just like console gaming for the reasons above, and more, I'm sure.

Maragenie

WillyFXP wrote: »

Regular PCs run x64 these days.

Just no.

WillyFXP

Maragenie wrote: »

Just no.

lol???? I dont even think you can buy a PC CPU that isn't x64 architechture now.

When asked what the native resolution of Titanfall Beta is/will be on the Xbox One, Abbie Heppe, Community Manager at Respawn confirmed the Titanfall Beta runs at native ’792p’ resolution, an increase from the previously rumoured 720p.

Abbie went on to say that the resolution will increase as the team edge closer towards a final build of Titanfall, and could potentially be in the region of 900p native resolution once complete.

Strange res, PC only for that game.

Maragenie wrote: »

Just no.

From 2010: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2366300,00.asp
From 2013: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Windows-8-x64-Now-the-Second-Top-Choice-for-Gamers-Worldwide-379745.shtml

Most laptops or desktops you buy now are x64. I don't know where you got your information from, but you are misinformed.

Tipsy McSwagger

How disappointing is that? 792p is a joke for one of the X1s most important titles. What's the frame rate? Probably 30fps. Another reason I'm delighted I sold that potato and will be playing this in glorious 1080p on my PC.

Frame rate is 60FPS with dips.

It's actually a big deal imo that they can't get their console exclusive which they paid millions for to run at next gen specs.

Varik

It's x86-64, it's still the x86 architecture.

Grayditch

I'd miss my friends lists if I moved exclusively to PC. I don't know nearly as many people playing on PC, they mostly all play WOW and Starcraft.

With PsPlus they're nearly all playing the same games every month, which can make for fun game nights.

Tipsy McSwagger

RasTa wrote: »

Frame rate is 60FPS with dips.

It's actually a big deal imo that they can't get their console exclusive which they paid millions for to run at next gen specs.

So it's 60fps max, this makes sense for that weird resolution, graphical power making way for smooth multiplayer.

runawaybishop

Retr0gamer wrote: »

For XBLIG. They definitely had the same thing in place for marketplace and physical retail games. Even if MS weren't directly doing it I'm sure they had a contractor that was properly monitored and audited.

For XBLIG the games were peer reviewed. They were not reviewed by Microsoft, unlike the ID@xbox program. Games going through MS studios were verified for quality for 360, often by independent labs. I have direct knowledge on this.

It's a beta as well not a full release. Who knows how old the build is and they'll be tweaking it right up until launch.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's a beta as well not a full release. Who knows how old the build is and they'll be tweaking it right up until launch.

They have already confirmed 900p is the max to get the 60 FPS.

RasTa wrote: »

They have already confirmed 900p is the max to get the 60 FPS.

I'll believe you if you can show any sort of evidence that confirms this nonsense.

Unless of course you live in a dimension where Forza 5 and NBA 2K14 doesn't exist.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'll believe you if you can show any sort of evidence that confirms this nonsense.

Unless of course you live in a dimension where Forza 5 and NBA 2K14 doesn't exist.

What are you talking about, did you not read my quote from the Respawn Community manager?

How about a wager then?

RasTa wrote: »

What are you talking about, did you not read my quote from the Respawn Community manager?

How about a wager then?

Ah right, sorry skipped over that. Sure it's only for Titanfall. It's not really indicative of anything since resolution and frame rates will vary from project to project depending on the requirements of the project.

RasTa wrote: »

What are you talking about, did you not read my quote from the Respawn Community manager?

How about a wager then?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Ah right, sorry skipped over that. Sure it's only for Titanfall. It's not really indicative of anything since resolution and frame rates will vary from project to project depending on the requirements of the project.

What I'd like to know is what sort of framerates/resolutions they'll get out of the 360. If they get full ones, then it really will show that the X1's devkit needs serious work.

eSRAM is probably a factor in not hitting 1080p. On 360 you had to tile the final framebuffer into 8MB chunks due to the eDRAM to get the final image which meant it was a pain in the ass getting 1080p apparently. While the One has 32MB of esRAM it's still in 8MB chunks that need to be tiled together.

Pure speculation on my part now.

I think, between the home consoles available in the domestic market, the PS4 is the best. It’s also excellent for graphics, being able to render 1080p at 60fps with room to spare. Since it does it a little better than other hardware, the image quality of the PS4 is the most beautiful. It’s the closest to the photorealistic quality we are aiming at

Hideo Kojima

CiDeRmAn

Is the resolution /framerate thing still going on?
I thought that was done pages and pages ago!
And what's this about the PS4 being a PC, does someone not know how to search before posting.
Another argument for the "Last week on Xbox 1 Vs PS4" catch up thread within a thread!

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Is the resolution /framerate thing still going on?
I thought that was done pages and pages ago!

When someone like Hideo Kojima says it, I stand up and take note.

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Is the resolution /framerate thing still going on?
I thought that was done pages and pages ago!
And what's this about the PS4 being a PC, does someone not know how to search before posting.
Another argument for the "Last week on Xbox 1 Vs PS4" catch up thread within a thread!

It was just mentioned specifically with regards Titanfall.