940°

Week In Tech: Hands On With Those New Games Consoles

It’s been a busy week in hardware and in my mortal hands I hold a laptop containing AMD’s Jaguar cores. The very same cores as found in the freshly minted games consoles from Microsoft and Sony. So what are they like and what does it mean for PC gaming?

Read Full Story >>
rockpapershotgun.com
MonkeyNinja3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

What a bunch of bull.

“On the one hand, it does rather look like [PC gamers will] pretty much never have to upgrade your CPU to cope with the next decade of console ports. Almost any half decent CPU you currently have will be game enough.”

Is that why Planetside 2 looks like max PC settings on PS4?
http://n4g.com/news/1282953...

And as for physics, is that why Knack runs at 60fps with hundreds of blocks spinning around the character?
https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Then theirs this: (Dark Sorcerer Tech Demo - 12min)
https://www.youtube.com/wat...

According to the article, most PC gamers already have a PC capable of running games like this. Yeah. Okay.

Pandamobile3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

All that stuff is likely done on the GPU now.

You needed a hefty CPU for bad console ports from last gen like GTA IV because the last gen consoles had good CPUs, but crappy GPUs.

As the years went on, PC saw huge increases in computing power, but CPUs didn't increase in power at nearly the same rate. These days, it's best to offload as much stuff as possible to GPUs and leave the CPUs free to do what they do.

Now that we've finally got a new batch of consoles, they're more or less up to date with current GPU programming practices, so we will see a much larger emphasis on GPU computing on consoles now, where it used to be solely a job for PC GPUs.

There's nothing special about Knack's physics. Pretty much every PhysX enabled PC game of the last half decade supports thousands, if not millions of rigid bodies interacting at real-time frame rates.

There's also nothing really special about the Dark Sorcerer tech demo either. It's a tech demo for QD's facial animation system. There isn't anything complicated about how the animations are performed on the GPU side of things, it's all about their capturing methods.

"According to the article, most PC gamers already have a PC capable of running games like this. Yeah. Okay."

It's true. If you've built a decent rig in the last few years, you're pretty much all set to go. PC tech has been "next-gen" for years now. We've just been waiting for the games (and consoles) to catch up and actually utilize the amazing hardware Nvidia and AMD have made.

NameRemoved00173986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

The days of crappy console ports is near its end, now that all 3 major platforms are the same architecture it would require a pretty crappy developer to pull that crap.

The consoles will probably have to pull some of the cpu power through Directcompute but that means less gpu power is available.

MonkeyNinja3986d ago

What PC specs would you need to run Planetside 2 @ 60fps 1080p? And how much would that cost?

It's very ignorant to compare a consoles specs directly to a PC's specs, which the author seems to do.

I guess he is right about most gamers having PCs that can run PS4 games though:
http://store.steampowered.c...

BTW, thank you for making a mature and detailed reply. I was expecting a PC elitist or troll to tear apart my comment.

NameRemoved00173986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@MonkeyBootey so if you use steam you automatically are a PC Gamer? No, most of those people with lower end pcs are there for older games or 2d games or they don't own any games at all and just have steam.

Planetside 2 was not running max on the PS4, where was the physx effects because I saw none of them because the PS4 is AMD not Nvidia. A lot of newer games have Physx which is a next generation particle effect pretty much but it will not be seen in any console games.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Pandamobile3986d ago

It probably costs around $800-1000 to get a PC to run Planetside 2 at 1080p60 on max settings. When the game first released, it was pretty unoptimized, but since then my framerate has doubled.

There's also been no confirmation on what resolution and framerate the PS4 version is targeting. 1080p60 might not be realistic for Planetside 2 on PS4.

NameRemoved00173986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@Pandamobile

The game is very CPU reliant (note this is old and the fps is a lot better than the beta):
http://i.imgur.com/5aJTp.pn...

This is one of those games that intel stomps amd by about 25-30fps with there i5s/i7s. With console optimization I think they could pull 60 as long as the gpu is good enough to push it at that res.

Pandamobile3986d ago

720p60 is one thing. 1080p60 is whole different game. We'll have to wait and see what the official word is, but my guess is that 1080p60 is a little optimistic, especially for a game that can potentially have 200+ people fighting in the same vicinity.

aquamala3986d ago

To answer the question of what pc would need to run planetside 2 at max settings, I think a 7950 is more than enough. So a $700-800 PC, and before you say a ps4 will be cheaper, add the $50 a year you need to play online.

And where in the game informer article say ps4 will run it a 60fps?

MusicComposer3986d ago

@aquamala Just to clarify, Sony stated that you do NOT need a PS Plus subscription to play Planetside 2 online on the PS4.

cee7733986d ago

@panda

You needed A beefy CPU for pc as well when gtaIV released I believe rockstar recommended A core 2 quad for gta.

decrypt3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@musiccomposer

Yes you may not need PS+ to play planetside 2, however planetside 2 isnt the only game why you buy a PS4.

Pretty much any other online game will require PS+, hence PS+ should be counted into the price of a PS4 (reoccurring 50usd every year).

Not to mention every game bought on the PS4 will cost 10-20usd more than PC versions, PS4 wont be getting the sort of price cuts seen on Steam or greenman gaming either.

Lastly PS4 wont have any BC too, which means all your PS3 library goes to a waste should your PS3 go bad or u decide to sell it. Any PC gamer having a collection of games as of today wont be effected by any of the above.

I would think a good PC costing few hundred more than the PS4 and able to out perform it, while also has BC for older games is a bargain at this point. Since the loss of not being able to play your older games on the PS4 has to be worth thousands for most gamers.

talisker3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@decrypt: You're picking your facts as they suit you. PS+ isn't only a multiplayer fee. It's also a great value of games that are coming with it, hundreds or even near a thousand-worth a year across three Sony platforms. If I'd count all PS+ games I got and tried to match it with 50 euros spent on Steam, there would be no comparison at all.

Also, why is everybody assuming PS3s will stop functioning the day PS4 comes out so "nobody can play their old games"?

decrypt3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@taliskar

One big difference between games you get on PS+ and the games you get on Steam for discounts.

You dont need to constantly keep paying to maintain the games you have on Steam. With PS+ its as if they have you locked on to paying 50usd a year. Even if you dont like the most of they gave you access to (i wouldnt call them free since you dont own them, they disappear the day your PS+ ends).

"Also, why is everybody assuming PS3s will stop functioning the day PS4 comes out so "nobody can play their old games"?"

Well everything inevitably dies, current consoles are known to die in 3-4 years of time. So even if you have a PS3 that doesnt ensure long term replayability of your library on it. Unless you are willing to keep buying the PS3 again and again when ever it does die. Also Sony may as well end PS3 online services in a few years time in an effort to push people onto the next console. You never can tell about console gaming its just too controlled, too much power in the hands of the console maker.

Edit: its funny you seem to count the so called thousands of usd worth of games you got on PS+, but totally ignore the thousands of usd you paid for the PS3 games, which will no longer be playable once your PS3 dies, unless you choose to keep rebuying the PS3. Might as well add PS2 to that list too (oh wait its no longer under production).

ShinMaster3986d ago

PS4 ain't running Windows OS. Everything on it will be optimized beyond what's possible on PC. Less need to overcompensate as with PCs.

President3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

What are you talking about? According to Steam stats, less than 5 percent have a higher end gpu than whats in the PS4: http://store.steampowered.c...

So while you and your friends have a GTX680, you're not represenative for the pc gaming community at all.

The Dark Sorcerer demo was not about facial animations, the whole scene was real time, and these graphics are what you can expect from PS4. Remember The Casting demo on PS3 back in 2006 by Quantic Dream? Heavy Rain and Beyond surpassed those graphics.

More proof we will see similar graphics? The Order 1886 was rendered in real time in-game

You will not be able to get these experiences on PC.

reynod3986d ago

@president

PS4 isnt out yet, its still got 5 months before release. PC tech constantly evolves.

Everyone knows the CPU in the PS4 and Xbox one are weak. So its just the GPU side. You can pretty much bet any 250usd GPU will be outperforming the PS4 at launch. few months further down the line it just wont be a contest any more as better PC tech roles out.

President3986d ago

No one is contest that. But saying your gpu was able to do what PS4 could do for the last 5 years is just a lie. Why should the PS4 which aims to sell 10s of millions compete with a niche market of high end gpu enthusiasts? Only 5pct of Steam users have a high end gpu card. Sony could put a GTX780 in the PS4, it wouldn't sell much. The Cell cpu was ahead of its time, it wasn't very profitable was it.

sourav933986d ago

@Panda I still think PhysX is overrated. As a PC/console gamer, I prefer Havok; Much more realistic physics, and it isn't a resource hog like PhysX. A lot of PC gamers agree to this fact. But there are some who just prefer the unrealistic and OTT look and feel of PhysX, even though it might tear their system apart. When you have to have a dedicated card just to run the physics engine for a game, you know something's not right.

Angeljuice3986d ago

PhysX has already been licenced for PS4, Nvidia and Sony have signed the papers.

GuyThatMakesSense3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

@hdshatter

"Planetside 2 was not running max on the PS4, where was the physx effects because I saw none of them because the PS4 is AMD not Nvidia. A lot of newer games have Physx which is a next generation particle effect pretty much but it will not be seen in any console games."

It may not have PhysX, but it does have particles comparable. See the PS4 trailer: https://www.youtube.com/wat...

AndrewLB3985d ago

@monkeybooty

you'll need about $500 if you get good deals. http://www.rockpapershotgun...

Kleptic3985d ago

Most of you guys touched on it very well...Nothing has changed, industry wise, to make this next console generation any different than how it always goes down...

The simple truth is...consoles are were the money is...period...it wasn't always that way, especially when consoles were offline (but they still made most of the publisher profit)...

what this creates is a rift in game development, even on the technology side...PCs have been capable of 'more' for years, but developers and publishers do not take the risk to put the millions of dollars in development for a moving target...its easy for PC guys to say how much better PC gaming is, and most of them put their laundry list up (not the case in this discussion, which is a great change) of their spec'd out rigs...but no matter how you slice it, those high end PC users make up such a small end of the market...no one is making games to fully take advantage of it...

but on the other hand, when a reletively weak console shows up...that hardware gets put through the industry, and becomes the standard...coding tech, middle ware, development tools, etc. all become more standard, easier to use, and less expensive...and this turns around and filters back to PC's, where the tech is utilized even more...

there is also the inevitable apples to oranges issue...PC hardware isn't running a PS4's, for example, OS...its running windows...an OS that is FAR from optimized for gaming...While a PS4/Xbox One may have an OS footprint ranging around 1GB during gaming (probably far less, but we'll see)...the average windows PC will have way more than that, and even worse, poor resource allocation that the end user has very little control over...other than simply uninstalling nearly every peice of software you generally run...Have you ever seen the complaints from PC users on what Chrome or Internet Explorer are doing in the background while you're trying to play BF3? its not pretty...

Thats why a PC with 16GB of Ram is becoming the standard fair, laptops with 8GB are almost never considering a 'gaming platform'...does it need 16gb to play a modern game? absolutely not...it only needs it because MS has never catered to the gaming crowd on how to turn off redundant processes when you actually need to really ring out the hardware...a problem consoles have never, and will never, have...

Pandamobile3985d ago

@GuyThatMakesSense

The Planetside 2 PS4 trailer was most likely captured from PC gameplay. While Nvidia is bringing PhysX to next gen consoles (just as they did with last gen hardware), they've not yet (or have no plans to) brought their GPU accelerated physics effects like particles, rigid body dynamics and vector fields.

Nvidia uses PhysX as a marketing tool for their GPUs. I don't think they're going to want to lose that sort of exclusivity by bringing one of flagship technologies to consoles.

3985d ago
Ju3985d ago

Funny discussion. Gameplay aside. Am I the only one thinking this game looks just awful? Can't even blame the developers. It's made by Sony (SOE). It's a massive online game and plays in enormous world, that's probably why the rest took a hit. But I don't quite get it what's so exciting about it - but then, I am probably too late, my beta is quite empty. It has vast empty worlds. I like to be on foot, vehicular combat is not mine, and this is quite boring in that play field.

Speaking of, my guess is, Sony probably has HW accelerated PhysiX for the PS4 - we know Sony signed a deal with NVidia. And I'd think it's probably compute accelerated (but sure not Cuda on an AMD chip) everything else would be pointless.

Anyway, compare this with Destiny and I know where I will be heading...

+ Show (22) more repliesLast reply 3985d ago
Pope_Kaz_Hirai_II3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

I can tell you any of the the things 360 had over ps3 are gone next gen
Ps4 will have: party chat
Custom soundtracks
No ram issues
Far more robust psn
360 was always cheaper.. now ps4 is cheaper
So is there any reason to game on live over psn now? I would love to hear them.

@panda .. as a fellow pc gamer we know that even a 300 $ pc today could do 1080p and 60fps in a lot of games so theconsoles would have to be very underpowered to not be capable of that.

Foxgod3986d ago

Great, now the Xb1 doesnt have Ram issues either, because like my pc (I7), it uses DDR3.
Would be strange if you claim my PC has RAM issue's considering its stronger then the XB1 and the PS4.

HenryFord3986d ago

You're surely right that the PS4 will feature a far more robust PSN. Considering that Xbox probably won't see a PSN any time soon.

kingPoS3986d ago

It's only natural that one would defend they're turf when under attack. Is there any other explanation?

doublebear3986d ago

Keeping their audience well informed? This is the PC gaming master race, they sit on the iron throne, you know that.

I think their assumption on the amount of cores available is wrong, but not on the individual performance. And I think you'll see some GPGPU improvements on the console side.

But with the PS3, Sony claimed to have a supercomputer on a chip, and certain fanboys believed them. Now Sony are claiming to have supercharged laptop chips, which is more reasonable.

Gamer19823986d ago

These article writers never take a lot of things into account like games for consoles utilizing the consoles exact hardware and PC fragmentation. PC is amazing I stopped using my PS3 and only use for the odd exclusive now and then and went PC a long time ago for top quality games but fragmentation means when making a PC game you cannot make it look better than say a PS3 for double the power of a specced PS3. Try it! Try play Crysis 3 at a stable 30FPS on a PC with 512mb RAM or even 1GB which is double and a single core 3.2GHZ cpu with a GeForce 7800 GT (which uses same core but is actually more than twice as powerful). Crysis 3 will be unplayable.

awi59513986d ago

Yeah i have a pc that can run all those games whats your point my crossfire build can beat PS4 and xbox now. ANd when i upgrade for BF4 PC no chance.

Krosis3986d ago

@MonkeyBootey

What really is the issue is consoles are not upgradable. Because consoles are the lead platform in the gaming industry they subsequently dictate the graphical bar in games as game developers have to make their games run smoothly on said lead platform.

For example, Crysis 1 was a PC-exclusive and designed as such--to use the very best hardware PC had to offer. That game would never run on consoles when it came out as it would have to be severely nurfed (was a poorly optimized game to begin with).

Consoles are impressive tech as they are built to run games over a 10 year period. However, the reality is computer hardware evolves and improves with every passing day. Because PCs are upgradable and can access the very best components as long as the customer has the cash, power is never an issue on PC as the games that are multiplatform generally offer little challenge to mid-to high end gaming rigs. To give the PC a workout they offer graphics settings that the user can up:tessellation, SSAO, AA etc..settings that would literally destroy the PS3 and Xbox 360 as the specs they have are outdated so quickly.

This generation, like everyone of them before it, the PS4 and Xbox One have specs that are more comparable with today's mid-end PCs. While the fanboys will disagree, new consoles regardless of the generation launch with Specs that are simply not as good as top-end PCs of 2-3 years ago. That's what >$2000K buys a PC enthusiast.

You have to be careful what you say. A multiplatform game, as long as the devs provide the graphics settings (they always do), will ALWAYS look better and best on a PC. This will never change as long as consoles have a price cap to stay under and are not upgradable. A lot of the graphical demos shown for Xbox and PS4 are impressive to console users as they are unfamiliar with computer hardware (they only see what the last console brought them. While Knack with his hundreds of blocks spinning around at 60fps is encouraging and impressive to a console user, these types of physics have been seen already and were possible on PC long before the announcement of PS4/Xbox One.

If PC was the lead platform and consoles were of no concern to developers, the graphics shown at E3 would not be overly impressive as PCs are capable of a lot more. But consoles ARE the lead platform and the easiest way to enjoy video games--thus graphics will always be destined to pertain to console ability and not the more fluid and powerful PC (unfortunately for graphic enthusiasts).

New consoles are always an awesome time for gamers. For PC because graphics can finally move forward (held back by years because of the last gen of consoles) and for console users because they can finally have their "next gen"--a concept that really only applies to finite hardware. PC evolves fluidly by the week and as fast as hardware is released-- there really isn't a "next gen".

Ultimately,no the processors of the new consoles are not that impressive in the PC world as PCs that are a few years old even have far better. You will see, as it is every generation of consoles, that shortly into a consoles life they become completely outdated hardware-wise when compared to what is available. It is VERY much like the cellphone market. It's like choosing a decent smartphone and sticking with it for the next 10 years. Thankfully for console users, and to the dismay of the PC crowd, consoles are (likely always)the lead platform and graphics will never be designed to exceed their ability.

Death3985d ago

Most PC gamers is kind of vague. Many PC gamers is probably close though. Good PC GPU's cost about the same as the next gen consoles. PC architecture is typically more advanced too. Console gamers are at war over GDDR5 being better than DDR3 when in reality PC's use DDR3 on the CPU side and GDDR5 on the GPU side. This is the best use of each type of ram since each has it's strong and weak points. Consoles can't do this due to space and cost.

My gaming PC is "better" than the consoles on the horizon, but I also paid about 10x as much. You can get similar or even better performance today for alot less though.

awi59513985d ago

They do not cost as much as console every gen we hear this crap. AT launch any mid range cheap butt pc card at 130 thats gone on sale will make console look like crap. It was the same with ps3 and xbox last gen and every gen before that. Consoles are limited thats just a fact even if you stress your GPu on Pc you can bring frame rates up to 30 fps and will look far better than console. I game at 60 fps on pc but 30 is very smooth and playable i just dont want that fps for multiplayer. But i have 2 powerful cards in my pc that i didnt break the bank for and with 4gigs total graphics memory games just run and look better on PC.

Also with those weak crappy cpus that are in consoles PC has nothing to worry about. Because we all know when the lighting and physics hit these consoles the will blow up from the stress. And since these are ATI cards they dont have physx so the GPU cant make up for the weak cpu for Ai, and physics so games will still look and play way better on PC and have more detail and more characters on screen.

Death3985d ago

PC's are much more powerful, but console specs don't change which makes efficiency and optimization much better. PC's are hands down more powerful, but you get what you pay for. My dual core Area51 m17x struggles compared to the current crop of consoles which were released a couple years before. Granted that's a laptop, but it was originally an $8000 laptop. My 2 gig overclocked 6950 on my AuroraAlx running all 4 liquid cooled cores at 4ghz and having 16gigs of DDR3 Vengence does a nice job, but I still can't max out all games. That's a hefty investment to not be "top of the line".

Anon19743985d ago

So, the original title of the article is "Hands On With Those New Games Consoles" and then the article leads with...

"Ha, sorry. Not really."

Who approves this?

TheKayle13985d ago

clearly monkeybootey u dont have any idea of what hardware run on pc nowdays...

my dual gpu setup (2 evga 660 ti) can perform 5.2tf (2.6 tf each one)

a ps4 can perform at 100% 1.8tf

MonkeyNinja3985d ago

I'm not, nor did I ever question a PCs ability to run a PS4-quality game. I said MOST PC gamers don't have a PC capable of running PS4-quality games.

TheKayle13985d ago (Edited 3985d ago )

again...MOST of pc r more powerful than a ps4 and a xbox one taped together..nowdays...

every i7 is 3 or 4 times (or more) powerfull than the dat 8 jaguar cores..

and is better we dont take in consideradions the gpus...

the only good thing about the ps4 is the unified ram pool...but it dont push performance is jsut bandwith..

TheKayle13985d ago

and xbox is far less performant than the ps4 so is better we dont talk about xbox too

Muffins12233985d ago

My pc could run this even without it being optimized for my gpu

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3985d ago
wishingW3L3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

the CPUs on the XB1 and PS4 are even weaker than the Cell and Xenon but with GPGPU computing everything will be fine.

edit: I'm not even talking about clock-speeds, they are just weaker. Period. APU's CPUs are the worst CPUs you'll find in the market right but they come with integrated cards that are much more powerful than Intel's HDs and because they come in the same die then APU are way cheaper and economic and that'all its advantage.

For PS4 and XB1 what they did was pair them with some decent medium-end discrete cards. That way they can do very advanced GPGPU computing because the CPU and GPU are on the same die, so there will be fast access and a huge unified memory pool to take advantage of.

Cell: 240 Gflops
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

APU CPU: 52 Gflops
http://electronicdesign.com...

As you can see the APU is way weaker than the Cell. ;)

Destrania3986d ago

Technically the CPU is not weaker. Clock speeds don't mean everything.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI3986d ago

...Clock speeds are absurdly important. You can have 20 cores if you want, but if they function at 1Ghz, it'll be kinda pointless.

duplissi3986d ago

yes and no, it all depends on how many calculations the cpu can perform in one cycle.

I would imagine that the cpu that the xb one and ps4 have can execute more tasks per cycle than the cpus from the ps3 and x360 so the fact that it runs at a lower speed may be irrelevant.

papashango3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

Calculations is not even the correct way to go about it. super pi is a benchmark built around calculations and while Intel would repeatedly destroy Amd CPUs here. Results in actual game benchmarks did not reflect this. Well. Not until sandy bridge came out

awi59513986d ago

Yeah tell that to anyone that bought the crappy amd FX series have slow speeds on alot of cores sucks for games. They jerk and dont run smooth at all.

duplissi3983d ago

@awi5951

dunno what you are talking about, but my 8350 handles games with aplomb, sure there are some games that having a good single thread capable cpu would give me better fps. skyrim is one game, but when i still get over 60 fps (minimum fps not average or max) with the game MAXED out does it really matter?

games are only going to be more multi core aware as we move forward so it is a moot point for gaming now. for other things maybe it is still an issue.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3983d ago
d3nworth13986d ago

No they're not. Its the number of cores that matter not the clock speed.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI3986d ago

It's a mixture of both actually. Ideally, you'd want something above 2.5-3Ghz and Quad-core these days, if you're a PC enthusiast.

Overall, but like I said because you can have as many cores as you want. But if they don't have a good clock speed, it's kinda pointless.

Kinda like having a broken microwave. Sure you got one, but it doesn't mean it'll heat up anything.

aquamala3986d ago

Cell's 240 Gflops number is using single precision floating point,

With double precision point (which is how everyone else measure gflops) it's only 21

I can't believe someone's still repeating that 240 number, it's only been debated for 7 years

OpenGL3986d ago

Double precision / FP64 is meaningless for games though.

wishingW3L3986d ago

but APUs are designed that way because like I said, the important part here it's the GPU. These days CPUs are becoming more and more irrelevant, and even more when it comes to gaming. So on the PS4 instead of having 2 pieces creating insane heat then now we only have 1, so it's easier to cool down and consoles will last longer.

Metfanant3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

oh lets see your actual "proof" of the CPU's being weaker please...oh right, it doesn't exist lol

the link you provided for the APU specs is comical...

1. its a Bobcat...PS4 is Jaguar...
2. its a 2 core....PS4 is 8...
3. the article is measuring performance of the whole APU at 52Gflops!
4. did you actual read the article? check out the video at the end. APU that the article tests is designed to power "digital signage" like touch screen kiosks!

my lord!

Gasian3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

I would say games are more GPU intensive and the matter of having a high-end CPU to run it is not as important. But Having a Good and well functioning CPU does a lot for the amount of tasks that are offloaded to enable GPU's for extra performance on the gaming side. They are both equally important when building a gaming device.

awi59513986d ago

APu's suck they should only be for Laptops and they suck there too.

Metfanant3985d ago

@Awi5951 i guess youre smarter than all the hardware techs at Sony and MS then...why don't you have a job doing this stuff???...oh wait...

how did i get any disagrees on my above post?....what did i say that was not completely factual?

awi59513985d ago (Edited 3985d ago )

Hey Metfanant

Both companies would have been better off if they took their current cpus that cost nothing now because they are old and made copies that had twice the cores at the same clock speed. And they would be far superior than these laptop cpus they have now. And we would see games never before seen on consoles developers could use all those cores at proper speeds for amazing AI,physics, and particle effects. With these crap cpus games will still struggle and be held back because of it. Hell microsoft would have been better off to pull a xbox original and pull a cpu off the shelf for the box and be in a way better position.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3985d ago
Muffins12233985d ago

Tobad no developer even optimized that crap

thebigman3985d ago

"While the CPU is powerful, the GPU is where the system gets its 52 GFLOP rating." Right from the article itself, and that's not even considering that Bobcat APU's were only 2 cores. Jaguar is 4 core, considerably more powerful, and the PS4 essentially has two of them in their APU.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3983d ago
AngelicIceDiamond3986d ago

Well if you look at Ryse, I'd beg to differ.

MysticStrummer3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

You're saying that's the best thing you saw at E3?

Visually I mean.

EDIT - Maybe a better question would be, are you saying that's the best thing you saw visually between PS4 and One at E3? Ryse looked cool to me, I just ask because I haven't seen anyone say it was the best looking of what was shown.

AngelicIceDiamond3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

It was one of the better looking games visually at E3 yes.

@Wish3l

right, ok...

wishingW3L3986d ago

Ryse was running on a PC with Windows 7 and a Nvidia GTX, so prepare to be disappointed when you play the actual game on XB1.

Jazz41083985d ago

Please prove ryse was on a pc. I played it on tbe sbowfloor with a dev kit. .if anything used pcs it was sonys conference hence why anyone at the show was impressed wjth ms games. One guy took a pic of a pc and a dev kit with windows 7 on it so every game musst use pc. Please stop the bs.

slapedurmomsace3986d ago

It was also running on a PC with pretty decent GPU (and I would assume a better CPU, but that's speculation)...I.E. much better than the Xbox One's. And yeah, the CPU's in both consoles are fairly weak. Sure they'll be ok for a couple of years, but they are going to show their age much more quickly than the 360 or the PS3. The x86 architecture means these systems are gonna be optimized much quicker than any other console generation. Personally I don't care. I think the latest PS3 games still look fantastic so it's not gonna bother me as much. Also maybe we won't have to wait 8 yrs for new hardware next time. I like the 5/6 year cycle, guess we'll see what happens.

MysticStrummer3986d ago

That's cool. What impresses people visually can be just as subjective as fun. Some hated the look of Borderlands, for example, while some loved it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3985d ago
PositiveEmotions3986d ago

There was a video of pc version of diablo 3 and the ps4 version and it looked the same accept for some small tiny detail in lighting but thats it.

NameRemoved00173986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

Diablo 3 is very optimized it can run on this:
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...

On max settings at 1080p with no graphics card.

I own an a8 3870k and it is well worth the price if you want a gaming PC that you can get for about $400, I have no use for it anymore since I have upgraded to intel and a dedicated gpu.

Also anyone wondering what to compare this cpu to heres what the a4-5400s raw power is, the xbox one/ps4 cpu would be double that.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net...

You will notice all that is there to compare it to is tablet/ultrabook cpus heres the list of Big boy cpus:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net...

The xbox one and Ps4 are roughly equal to a phenom X4 (not a good cpu avoid at all cost)

Pandamobile3986d ago

That's because it's Diablo 3. It wasn't exactly hard to rum.

Virtual_Reality3986d ago (Edited 3986d ago )

Diablo 3 was designed to be on consoles, since the beginning of the production.

That is why the game is kinda different compared to Diablo 2, from features, graphics (everyone expected better graphics), to the way to play it using skills etc. It didn't live up the expectation for the PC audience compared to Diablo 2.

The reason the quests make you walk in a linear closed circuit as opposed to big open worlds, is to keep your buds next to you on the same screen.

The reason you have 4-5 skills on your bar at once? Very easy to use an Xbox/PS3 controller to use skills.

The reason you can't host a named game? Auto join for console users.

Then Blizzard announced is coming to the consoles, which makes sense, the game is going to be more fun to play on consoles than PC, because like I said, it was designed to be on consoles, there are many reasons and evidence of it, so consoles can run the game easily.

Show all comments (116)
350°

Microsoft's quest for short-term $$$ is doing long-term damage to Windows, Surface, Xbox, and beyond

Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation, and it all revolves around Satya Nadella and CFO Amy Hood's plans to increase every department's margins.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
Brazz18h ago

"The plan to move Xbox games to other platforms is codenamed "Latitude" internally, and I know there's debate and unease at Microsoft about whether or not this is a good idea. More upcoming Microsoft-owned games slated for PlayStation are already being developed. At least for now, they're potentially obvious games you'd most likely expect. And yes, while it's true Microsoft is a prolific publisher on PlayStation already, it has typically revolved around specific franchises like Minecraft. From what I've heard, Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation, and it all revolves around Satya Nadella and CFO Amy Hood's mandate to increase every department's margins. "

Yeah, they are going to kill Xbox hardware.

Xeofate16h ago

"Yeah, they are going to kill Xbox hardware."

It's for the best.

Quit stringing along xbox fans and screwing over PlayStation owners.

crazyCoconuts11h ago

Take good care of those Xboxes if you have 'em ...

outsider162411h ago

An Xbox game on a Playstation. Never in my years of gaming did i ever thought this was gonna happen.

jznrpg7h ago

It is dying anyway so doesn’t make much of a difference

VersusDMC6h ago

No way can they get rid of the hardware as probably 90% of game pass subscribers are hardware users.

Highly doubtful those users will move to PC or Cloud to subscribe there and the competition (Sony and Nin) will never have gamepass on their system.

If they want to keep the current subscribers, they need to keep releasing new hardware.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 6h ago
gold_drake18h ago

i think it will kill off the xbox brand. windows will be fine.

but there is and would be a chance that xbox might be killed off in the future. if they fail to make the money they put in. imo.

S2Killinit15h ago

They wont kill it, but they will go fully PC while keeping xbox as a brand, and go multiplatform for the most part. They will also work tirelessly to diminish console gaming’s importance.

PRIMORDUS12h ago

It would be best if Xbox goes the way of Sega, just make and publish games. I know I myself will not support them at all with buying games from them, you all can. 🙃

ChasterMies10h ago

The Xbox brand will live for the games. I don’t expect Microsoft to entirely drop out of gaming hardware. They make Surface tablets and laptops. They’ll make Xbox branded hardware for those that want it.

shadowT17h ago

"Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation"

Forza and Starfield next?

Skuletor15h ago

Starfield would be no surprise and there's the rumor that it will come to Playstation after the Shattered Space DLC, Forza (along with Halo and Gears of War) I find less likely but I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually end up on PlayStation too, especially if Xbox give up on hardware and go the Sega route.

shinoff218315h ago

Not to worried about forza. I'd rather see others like what inxile and obsidian are working on. Starfield sounds like it needs more time in the oven so let it cook first imo. If starfield and it's a small if does release on ps it'll be in the fall around the time for dlc or right at the dlc and come packaged with it.

-Foxtrot16h ago

In the words of Phil Spencer when he was talking about Nintendo last year

“It's just taking a long time for Microsoft to see that their future exists off of their own hardware"

S2Killinit15h ago

Yup. MS are a cancer to console gaming.

Aloymetal14h ago

100%!!
I wonder what happened to that dude that was always here posting those court articles with cartoons about MS spending all those billions in studios. He suddenly disappeared, I guess he doesn't like bad news when the green brand is in trouble. No new articles from him as of late...

PRIMORDUS12h ago

Yup, and it's only going to keep spreading.

Outside_ofthe_Box12h ago

Phil Spencer's words always comes back to bite him lol

16h agoReplies(7)
Show all comments (63)
130°

Microsoft's Absurd Antics Have Me Scared For Dishonored And Arkane Lyon's Future

With Arkane Austin no more and Lyon living for who knows how long, the superb Dishonored is in serious danger; Microsoft cannot be trusted.

Relientk772d ago

I love the Dishonored series so much and really want Dishonored 3. Microsoft better not screw this up.

JEECE2d ago

I mean, I think the fans will probably kill Arkane Lyon by cooking up reasons to hate whatever they do next without playing it. I've never seen a game so artificially disliked as Deathloop.

thesoftware7302d ago

Lol, why don't we just say, we are worried about all studios owned by MS now. They will keep closing studios until they have none left ...🙄

Skuletor2d ago

Just merge them all into a single studio, have it churn out a single Call of Duty every year and call it a day, lol.

Barlos2d ago

Don't be scared, you'll be fine.

Skuletor2d ago

It's exputer, fine is one word I would not associate with them.

Profchaos2d ago

I think it's becoming clear based on matt bootys comments there's no future for any IP that can't sell above 10 million within the launch window. But is also a small game that gives them prestige

/S it's beyond a joke right now

Show all comments (10)
290°

More Job Losses At Xbox, “There’s More To Come”: Paul Thurrott

Paul Thurrott in a recent episode commented on the on-going Microsoft fiasco hinting at more job losses and that "there's more to come".

Read Full Story >>
spieltimes.com
Sonic18814d ago (Edited 4d ago )

There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future . Xbox has to pay Microsoft back. It might take two decades to do that.

sagapo4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

I don’t understand what you’re saying. Xbox IS microsoft so there’s no “paying back “.
And MS gross profit in 2023 was over 140 billion dollars so forget your 2 decades.

Unless you mean the money MS invested in Xbox (acquisitions included) and the time it will take for xbox as a brand to gain that money back on it’s own, then yeah, that could take a while.

romulus233d ago

The better term to use might be return on investment, xbox is simply a division of Microsoft one that MS can easily do away with if profit margins are not met. So in that regard he's right, if xbox isn't showing the expected return on investment the higher ups are expecting than it's unlikely Microsoft will acquire any other studios any time soon, especially if they are spending billions buying developers just to shut them down in the end.

MrBaskerville3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Xbox is a division that they discussed shutting down but doubled down on after Gamepass was pitched.

It needs to make money at some point. Big money.

rokos3d ago

According to Statista the net income of Microsoft is about $72.4 billion dollars which is a bit lower than last year profit. That is almost as much as Activision's acquisition but I assume that would be a one off since it costs so much plus I see how their focus has been shifted to AI, thus any major future investments will probably be in that area.

Markusb333d ago

i think you are really missing the point

VariantAEC3d ago

@romulus23
That is not why MS buys studios. They might continue to buy because it's about taking that sweet sweet IP out of the corporate husks of their acquisitions.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
SonyStyled4d ago

“There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future”

No bro, there do be is for Microsoft not acquiring for what is now if not what it be is 😂

4d ago Replies(2)
ChasterMies3d ago

Xbox isn’t a separate company from Microsoft. It’s all Microsoft.

Abear213d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Let’s be real, this is the media spinning all the acquisitions and liquidations of said developers and spinning it to make M$ the villain.

This was bound to happen, a bigger slice of pie and cut costs, when the games come they stand to make more and that’s their agenda—it was the writing on the wall when the sales went through and legally all those who approved the sale and mergers knew this would happen.

Snowflakes need to realize business is ugly and you can cry all you want but this is how capitalism works. And it works.

That said, M$ needs to steer the narrative and grab hold of all this, make their plans known, hype the hell out of all those dead IP’s they plan to revive, and be honest about the timeline. This is likely to involve mobile and IP on other consoles, and most people realize that.

The problem is this company is incapable of being transparent and seems to often want to dissuade and confuse is customer base. The lack of E3 has hurt Microsoft and I don’t think they know how to properly or effectively market their brand anymore.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
jwillj2k44d ago

There really needs to be a class action lawsuit here. You buy these companies just to put people out of jobs. And it’s not like something happened to derail their plans this WAS the plan. Microsoft has no business in this space at all.

franwex4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

Microsoft has been doing this for years. They simply want the IPs. Look at Nokia. Look at Skype. This time it simply expanded to games. Gaming is not as important to Microsoft’s executives as it was to the founders too. Bill Gates was willing to sell the og Xbox at a loss. Steve Balmer approved the red ring of death fiasco. This CEO isn’t really a gamer.

-Foxtrot4d ago

Maybe it's time though to put a stop to it and use a big giant like Microsoft as a huge example to the rest of these big companies.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

People like the FTC and the like went against Microsoft yet their Actvision deal was still allowed to go through yet look what's happened...it's not even Acitivisions studios aswell, it's Bethesdas.

VariantAEC3d ago

Years?

Try several decades, and in the gaming space 2.3 decades.

Jon615863d ago

You do realize this happens in ALL industries? Or are you just saying this because it is Microsoft? In any case I feel for those that are being let go but the trch industry is suffering right now.

jwillj2k43d ago (Edited 3d ago )

This absolutely does NOT happen all the time. Let me know the last time 1 company with a terrible product track record spent 100 billion onto acquire MULTIPLE successful companies in under a year only to shut them down and stop making their products regardless of how successful they were. Not merge them, completely shut them down.

And you can’t use Microsoft in your example.

Notellin3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Class action lawsuit? The law is on their side and protects them at all costs. There are no rules to protect the people at the bottom.

jwillj2k43d ago

Not true when it comes to mass layoff do your research.

RNTody4d ago

Ninja Theory, Perfect Dark, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Wolfenstein 3, Dishonored, Prey, Doom, Quake... something tells me that bad things are going to happen to these entities under Microsoft.

MrDead3d ago

ID software, the makers of Doom and Wolfenstein that have been with us since 1991 could be gone and MS will keep the IPs.

I hope some of these studios can buy their freedom from MS otherwise this is going to be even more devastating for the industry and gamers.

Yui_Suzumiya3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

That's exactly what I'm worried about. I've been a fan of id since Wolfenstein 3D and I'm honestly afraid.

lodossrage3d ago

Toys for Bob saw the writing on the wall and bought themselves out.

Wouldn't be the first time a company did that under MS either. Bungie and Twisted Pixel did the same. Considering what just happened, I can see some other devs trying to buy themselves out too.

anast4d ago

Good thing the bosses of all those small studios made their money.

glenn19794d ago

they cant do it right now they will get burned

XiNatsuDragnel3d ago

Phil and his team need to be gone

lodossrage3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Won't make a difference.

The whole structure needs to be overhauled. Anyone that replaces Phil will be no different than him, Mattrick, or anyone else.

Until the company changes how they go about business, nothing will change

glenn19793d ago

I just don't have any idea what they would do , they have done sooo much damage on their xbox brand, they have a show at July or June I think, but will it even matter even they show amazing games, idkn

lodossrage3d ago

True,

But they may as well get it over with. Whether it happens now or later, the burning is going to hit the same.

Reality is the ONE move that can alleviate a lot of this is the one move they can't make. Remove day 1 from gamepass.

Show all comments (68)