The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-14-2013, 03:17 PM   #476
NUB
Just Crafted
 
NUB's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,529

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

You people are total fools if you think Microsoft's idea will ever lower the price of games.
NUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 03:26 PM   #477
lolcopter
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheChamp24 View Post
Microsoft seems to have the opinion they think they know what the ________ want, and are going to give them that.
insert -- desktop users, mobile phone users, gamers and that's pretty much the MS business strategy lately

instead of taking an already stellar system and making it better (windows 7, Xbox 360), they'd rather go for drastic changes to make a big splash, which possibly ends up backfiring in their face (windows 8, xbone)
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 03:31 PM   #478
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NUB View Post
You people are total fools if you think Microsoft's idea will ever lower the price of games.
I know right? Looking at Xbox on demand right now you generally see prices that are as high if not higher than in-store prices. I'll be shocked if that changes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 03:52 PM   #479
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
I know right? Looking at Xbox on demand right now you generally see prices that are as high if not higher than in-store prices. I'll be shocked if that changes.
I'm really not sure how much of it is M$ vs the developers themselves though. I think it's kinda up to the developers how much they charge through different channels. Most likely scenario (like represented below) is that developers don't want to piss off their retail channels by undercutting them.

That seems consistent with what you see in other digital distribution systems (aka Steam). The big devs' pricing is consistent with retail. It's the indies who sell their games cheaper to pump up demand.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 04:45 PM   #480
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
I'm really not sure how much of it is M$ vs the developers themselves though. I think it's kinda up to the developers how much they charge through different channels. Most likely scenario (like represented below) is that developers don't want to piss off their retail channels by undercutting them.

That seems consistent with what you see in other digital distribution systems (aka Steam). The big devs' pricing is consistent with retail. It's the indies who sell their games cheaper to pump up demand.
I'm sure you are right. The point remains that digital distribution prices aren't going to drop on AAA titles on the new consoles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2013, 04:51 PM   #481
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,557

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default

I think it would take a while but prices would drop in a fully digital scenario (might take 10 years).
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 01:42 PM   #482
Willynowei
Some dude
 
Willynowei's Avatar
 
Football is a wonderful thing.

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 3,017

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ryan Clady
Default

After all the bickering about system specs, the E3 trailers seem to indicate that the theoretical performance gap (if there is one), has not produced notable image quality differences in the games displayed.

Only time will truly tell but so far it looks like I was right. I love being right.
Willynowei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 03:16 PM   #483
2KBack
Rumblin' Bumblin'
 
2KBack's Avatar
 
Cake is delicious

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wash DC
Posts: 7,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willynowei View Post
After all the bickering about system specs, the E3 trailers seem to indicate that the theoretical performance gap (if there is one), has not produced notable image quality differences in the games displayed.

Only time will truly tell but so far it looks like I was right. I love being right.
The gaps between the Original X-box and PS2, then the 360 and PS3 were oft talked about, but rarely experienced. I highly doubt that changes
2KBack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 03:23 PM   #484
Agamemnon
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2KBack View Post
The gaps between the Original X-box and PS2, then the 360 and PS3 were oft talked about, but rarely experienced. I highly doubt that changes
I thought the gap was rather obvious. It's not the huge leap that took place between the previous two generations, but it's still rather noticeable.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 03:27 PM   #485
Ratboy
It's all over...
 
Ratboy's Avatar
 
ಠ_ಠ

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 14,963
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lolcopter View Post
insert -- desktop users, mobile phone users, gamers and that's pretty much the MS business strategy lately

instead of taking an already stellar system and making it better (windows 7, Xbox 360), they'd rather go for drastic changes to make a big splash, which possibly ends up backfiring in their face (windows 8, xbone)
They are already fixing Windows 8 with 8.1. It's a start.

Still won't buy xbone.
Ratboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 03:32 PM   #486
Ratboy
It's all over...
 
Ratboy's Avatar
 
ಠ_ಠ

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 14,963
Default

I just sold my Xbox 360 for $200. Will most likely buy a Wii U and eventually a PS4 when released.
Ratboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 04:12 PM   #487
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,557

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
I'm really not sure how much of it is M$ vs the developers themselves though. I think it's kinda up to the developers how much they charge through different channels. Most likely scenario (like represented below) is that developers don't want to piss off their retail channels by undercutting them.

That seems consistent with what you see in other digital distribution systems (aka Steam). The big devs' pricing is consistent with retail. It's the indies who sell their games cheaper to pump up demand.
Devs make about 30. Biggest outside cut goes to retailers. There's room for disruption once they go full digital.
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2013, 11:20 PM   #488
Doggcow
Rebel Laughs
 
Doggcow's Avatar
 
At Unbelievers

Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,916

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agamemnon View Post
I thought the gap was rather obvious. It's not the huge leap that took place between the previous two generations, but it's still rather noticeable.
On paper.

Seriously, anyone who thinks system specs of the lowest common denominator won't be the most important is fooling themselves.
Doggcow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 02:47 AM   #489
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willynowei View Post
After all the bickering about system specs, the E3 trailers seem to indicate that the theoretical performance gap (if there is one), has not produced notable image quality differences in the games displayed.

Only time will truly tell but so far it looks like I was right. I love being right.
Almost nothing Microsoft showed was on real XB1 hardware, FYI.

There are pictures all over the internet of demo units crashing to Windows 7 desktops, and pictures from inside the demo cabinets when MS was rebooting them that clearly shows an HP desktop with a Nvidia GTX graphics card visible through a plexy side panel on the towers.

Here's a link if you don't feel like searching:
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbo...rds-56737.html

Much of what they showed was also concept videos (Sunset Overdrive, Black Tusk's game, Quantum Break, etc., if it doesn't show a HUD it's almost definitely not real).

Also, games at their conference that have PC versions showed the PC version instead (Battlefield 4 didn't even cover up a visible backspace prompt during it's real time showing), and that most major 3rd parties were demoing their new titles on PS4 hardware says something (Ubisoft's AC:Black Flag, Watch_Dogs, and The Division, everything Square Enix showed, etc.)

This isn't surprising though. A very solid source on a popular video game message board (NeoGAF) who called 90% of MS' E3 conference in advance also said that they were having serious yield issues on the APU due to the ESRAM, so turning out close to final hardware right now for them isn't easy.

Very few games were confirmed to even be shown on Xbox One hardware, Harmonix's new Fantasia game is one of the few and is far from a visual showpiece.

Also, even MS' "real time but not in game, please believe us" videos didn't stack up to Sony's "real time but not in game, please believe us" videos. Quantic Dream's The Dark Sorcerer "real time" tech demo is leagues ahead of anything anyone else has shown.
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 03:01 AM   #490
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2KBack View Post
The gaps between the Original X-box and PS2, then the 360 and PS3 were oft talked about, but rarely experienced. I highly doubt that changes
Did you own both an Xbox and a PS2? Because despite every multiplat being PS2 games ported onto Xbox hardware they still looked significantly better while also frequently offering 720p while the PS2 version was stuck at 480i.

The Xbox had a significant hardware advantage and it showed in it's ports despite most developers designing for the PS2's unique architecture and porting over.

The Xbox 360 and PS3 are very close hardware. Similar memory allocation (slightly more for the X360 due to EDRAM, also much easier to code for thanks to a unified pool, Sony used two split pools, one of XDR and one of GDDR3, that moved data faster than the X360's solution but bottlenecked on capacity). Both CPUs descended from PowerPC architecture, but the Cell was a far more advanced variation with a good bit more power. The ATi GPU in the Xbox 360 was more powerful than the RSX put into the PS3.

End result was more or less comparable hardware with a slight edge to the PS3 since the gap between the CPUs was a good bit larger than the GPU gap. Developers who were entirely PS3 focused doing things on PS3 no one could achieve on Xbox 360 (Naughty Dog with the Uncharted series and most recently The Last of Us), but with X360 being far easier to program for and first on the market, it was easily the multi-plat target of choice with PS3 receiving ports (especially from the PC focused developers who never really got a handle on managing the PS3's split memory pools).

Now it's all x86, AMD/ATi build hadware running dev software based on Visual Studio. Making use of the hardware gap now is about as easy as developing a PC game to have medium, high, and ultra graphics settings, which almost every developer publishing on PC already does. The only real wrinkle thrown into this is just how much extra work it will take developers to get acceptable memory bandwidth out of the XB1's ESRAM/DDR3 set up while on PS4 and PC (thanks to on-board GDDR5 on all medium to high end GPUs) that won't be a problem.
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 03:53 AM   #491
rmsanger
Ring of Famer
 
rmsanger's Avatar
 
Another one bites the dust!

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,868

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Will be keeping my PS3 crew... Nothing demonstrated thus far makes me want to shell out the cheddar for next gen consoles.
rmsanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 05:26 AM   #492
2KBack
Rumblin' Bumblin'
 
2KBack's Avatar
 
Cake is delicious

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wash DC
Posts: 7,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
Did you own both an Xbox and a PS2? Because despite every multiplat being PS2 games ported onto Xbox hardware they still looked significantly better while also frequently offering 720p while the PS2 version was stuck at 480i.

The Xbox had a significant hardware advantage and it showed in it's ports despite most developers designing for the PS2's unique architecture and porting over.

The Xbox 360 and PS3 are very close hardware. Similar memory allocation (slightly more for the X360 due to EDRAM, also much easier to code for thanks to a unified pool, Sony used two split pools, one of XDR and one of GDDR3, that moved data faster than the X360's solution but bottlenecked on capacity). Both CPUs descended from PowerPC architecture, but the Cell was a far more advanced variation with a good bit more power. The ATi GPU in the Xbox 360 was more powerful than the RSX put into the PS3.

End result was more or less comparable hardware with a slight edge to the PS3 since the gap between the CPUs was a good bit larger than the GPU gap. Developers who were entirely PS3 focused doing things on PS3 no one could achieve on Xbox 360 (Naughty Dog with the Uncharted series and most recently The Last of Us), but with X360 being far easier to program for and first on the market, it was easily the multi-plat target of choice with PS3 receiving ports (especially from the PC focused developers who never really got a handle on managing the PS3's split memory pools).

Now it's all x86, AMD/ATi build hadware running dev software based on Visual Studio. Making use of the hardware gap now is about as easy as developing a PC game to have medium, high, and ultra graphics settings, which almost every developer publishing on PC already does. The only real wrinkle thrown into this is just how much extra work it will take developers to get acceptable memory bandwidth out of the XB1's ESRAM/DDR3 set up while on PS4 and PC (thanks to on-board GDDR5 on all medium to high end GPUs) that won't be a problem.
Yes, I've owned every system (outside of the 32x) since the NES. It is always more about the programmer than the hardware, no matter how many numbers get tossed around.
2KBack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 08:01 AM   #493
Willynowei
Some dude
 
Willynowei's Avatar
 
Football is a wonderful thing.

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 3,017

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ryan Clady
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
Almost nothing Microsoft showed was on real XB1 hardware, FYI.

There are pictures all over the internet of demo units crashing to Windows 7 desktops, and pictures from inside the demo cabinets when MS was rebooting them that clearly shows an HP desktop with a Nvidia GTX graphics card visible through a plexy side panel on the towers.

Here's a link if you don't feel like searching:
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbo...rds-56737.html

Much of what they showed was also concept videos (Sunset Overdrive, Black Tusk's game, Quantum Break, etc., if it doesn't show a HUD it's almost definitely not real).

Also, games at their conference that have PC versions showed the PC version instead (Battlefield 4 didn't even cover up a visible backspace prompt during it's real time showing), and that most major 3rd parties were demoing their new titles on PS4 hardware says something (Ubisoft's AC:Black Flag, Watch_Dogs, and The Division, everything Square Enix showed, etc.)

This isn't surprising though. A very solid source on a popular video game message board (NeoGAF) who called 90% of MS' E3 conference in advance also said that they were having serious yield issues on the APU due to the ESRAM, so turning out close to final hardware right now for them isn't easy.

Very few games were confirmed to even be shown on Xbox One hardware, Harmonix's new Fantasia game is one of the few and is far from a visual showpiece.

Also, even MS' "real time but not in game, please believe us" videos didn't stack up to Sony's "real time but not in game, please believe us" videos. Quantic Dream's The Dark Sorcerer "real time" tech demo is leagues ahead of anything anyone else has shown.
lmao.

Show me clear evidence that any of the PS4 demos were running on actual hardware. You can't. All you're saying is Sony released a better tech demo, I'd say that's less convincing than the game's they are willing to show, even if its still running on the dev kits, which all of them were, most likely.

Until a similarly technically demanding game is gold on both systems, we won't know for sure, as of now it looks like visual parity.

Last gen, GTAIV ran at roughly 30% higher resolution with better post processing on the Xbox 360, and most consumers still couldn't tell which one was better in a blind test.

It is highly unlikely from what i've seen so far that the differences will be as measurable this time around. I'll leave it at that.
Willynowei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 08:19 AM   #494
Boobs McGee
I promise to stay alive
 
Boobs McGee's Avatar
 
till the day that I die

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Glendale
Posts: 5,002

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matty P
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willynowei View Post
lmao.

Show me clear evidence that any of the PS4 demos were running on actual hardware. You can't. All you're saying is Sony released a better tech demo, I'd say that's less convincing than the game's they are willing to show, even if its still running on the dev kits, which all of them were, most likely.

Until a similarly technically demanding game is gold on both systems, we won't know for sure, as of now it looks like visual parity.

Last gen, GTAIV ran at roughly 30% higher resolution with better post processing on the Xbox 360, and most consumers still couldn't tell which one was better in a blind test.

It is highly unlikely from what i've seen so far that the differences will be as measurable this time around. I'll leave it at that.
Well, here's an article with some rumors that completely disagree with your opinion.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaud...out-at-amazon/

"I was able to check out both PS4 and Xbox One games with hands-on demos at E3 this past week. Infamous Second Son stood out in the Sony first party camp, along with Driveclub, Killzone Shadow Fall and Knack. Microsoft had a solid racer with Forza Motorsport 5 and Capcom’s Dead Rising 3 offered an open world zombie experience. Respawn’s Titanfall (an Xbox One, Xbox 360 and PC exclusive) stood out in the crowded shooter genre with its micture of giant Titans and on-foot pilots gameplay.

In talking to a developer who wished to remain anonymous, gamers will see a difference on Day One when they compare third party PS4 games to Xbox One head-to-head. The developer told me the PS4 is 40 percent more powerful than Xbox One and games like Call of Duty Ghosts will be noticeably different out of the gate.

In the past, Xbox 360 games looked better out of the gate and over time PS3 games progressively improved to the point where games like The Last of Us and Beyond: Two Souls stand out even against some next gen titles. But if this differentiator holds true, not only will Xbox One games have DRM issues and no rental options and limited used game opportunities, the games won’t look as good as PS4 titles. That sounds like a perfect storm of negativity for the hardcore gamers.

This processing power issue also could be a potential reason behind the latest controversy that has emerged for Microsoft at E3, in which photos were taken of some Xbox One games running on Windows 7 PCs with NVIDIA graphics cards. Sony PS4 developers took to Twitter saying PS4 demos were running on PS4 dev kits. I know playing PS4 games behind closed doors that the PS4 was clearly visible as I played.
"


Also, here's a follow up article to yours, Drek (another confirmation)
http://gamerhub.tv/articles/xbox-one...e3/2013/06/16/
Boobs McGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 08:22 AM   #495
Boobs McGee
I promise to stay alive
 
Boobs McGee's Avatar
 
till the day that I die

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Glendale
Posts: 5,002

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matty P
Default

Also, here's another article with tweets from the developers themselves, in regards to what they were running their demos on:
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/...ll-for-launch/

"Earlier today, CinemaBlend commented on the fact that a broken Xbox One game returned to the Windows 7 home screen, and that, in a pic we could see that it was running on a Nvidia 700 series GTX GPU (the Xbox One uses AMD). The Battlefield 4 demo ‘running on Xbox One’ was also spotted to include the PC command ‘backspace’. While it sounded terrible – these are meant to be console games, CinemaBlend tried to put things into perspective:

Truth be told, none of this should be a surprise to most people given that all E3 demos run their games on high-end PCs; it’s a smoke and mirrors circus to sell the idea of the game, sort of like how pro wrestling sells the idea of fighting despite being scripted. We should all be used to it by now and it’s just common practice [from most studios] given that the devkits or comparable specs aren’t usually finalized at this point.

Turns out, however, that they are wrong. Developer of upcoming PS4/PC/iOS title The Witness Jonathan Blow tweeted (tweets ordered for clarity):

It is not true as the article says that “all E3 demos run on hi-end PCs”. The Witness was running on PS4 dev hardware, and it looked to me like all the other PS4 games were running on dev kits as well.

Dev hardware is the hardware that will be in the final retail box, but in a less consumer-oriented package.

Dev kits almost always have more RAM yeah. Better CPU+GPU, no…

All the indies I know were running on the PS4.

We worked very hard to get our game running on the actual PS4 hardware and operating system in time for the show. As did many other devs.

Sucker Punch’s Jason Connell added:

Yup, we were definitely on a dev kit. [For inFamous: Second Son]

Blow commented:

That is kind of crazy considering consoles are supposed to be on the shelves with these games in 5-6 months.

During Microsoft’s press show I was impressed by how good the games looked given the console’s specs. But if they weren’t running on those specs then it becomes pretty questionable.

I actually don’t want XB1 to fail because we need competition to keep things healthy.

And finally:

I’m seeing a lot of forum comments saying “it is no big deal, most E3 demos are on PCs”. False. I wonder if this is “reputation management”.

This whole thing sounds utterly bizarre: has Microsoft been essentially lying to journalists and viewers with games running on completely different hardware? Aliens: Colonial Marines drew intense criticism after it was revealed that journalists played a better version of the game than was actually released, and it’s hard not to feel deja vu.
"
Boobs McGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 08:44 AM   #496
Willynowei
Some dude
 
Willynowei's Avatar
 
Football is a wonderful thing.

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 3,017

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ryan Clady
Default

Dev Kits are simply modified PC's. It's cheaper and less time consuming to just take an unoptimized game and throw it on a high-end PC than to spend time optimizing a segment of the game just for E3.

As for the rest of your posts, i'll take anonymous developer speculation with a grain of salt.
Willynowei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 09:07 AM   #497
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willynowei View Post
Dev Kits are simply modified PC's. It's cheaper and less time consuming to just take an unoptimized game and throw it on a high-end PC than to spend time optimizing a segment of the game just for E3.

As for the rest of your posts, i'll take anonymous developer speculation with a grain of salt.
This isn't how it works at all. Final dev kits are final system hardware with expanded features and connectivity to PCs. Alpha and beta kits are high end PCs so that they can emulate hardware specific features not actually available on PC hardware, but are meant to give an environment as close to the final build as possible with hopes of easy transitions between kit overhauls. All games made on them are programmed in advance to use the specific hardware features of the target console that generally doesn't exist elsewhere.

So what exactly is MS doing with a Windows 7 PC to emulate the cache methodology needed to stream data from DDR3 to the ESRAM for maximum bandwidth to the GPU? Last I checked Nvidia doesn't have an all in one card with 32MB of ESRAM. You can't just plug and play that **** over.

Also, you sure as hell don't change from ATi cards in your dev kits to Nvidia cards in your desktop demo units just because it's "easier". If anything there should be a significant amount of ATi specific shader implementation going on that would make a direct Nvidia jump painful if not nearly impossible. On PC we already have "runs better on ATi" and "best on Nvidia graphics" advertising pushes, with a console using ATi silicon that difference should only be magnified.

Its smoke and mirrors, simple as that. Again not surprising given the rumors about MS' hardware fabrication issues, a lead technical director at Avalanche (Just Cause franchise) saying that not only was Sony's system currently more powerful but that their development tools were also further advanced, etc..
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 09:10 AM   #498
Heyneck
Ring of Famer
 
Heyneck's Avatar
 
RIP Tripplets!

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cali, Colombia
Posts: 2,349

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
Did you own both an Xbox and a PS2? Because despite every multiplat being PS2 games ported onto Xbox hardware they still looked significantly better while also frequently offering 720p while the PS2 version was stuck at 480i.

The Xbox had a significant hardware advantage and it showed in it's ports despite most developers designing for the PS2's unique architecture and porting over.

The Xbox 360 and PS3 are very close hardware. Similar memory allocation (slightly more for the X360 due to EDRAM, also much easier to code for thanks to a unified pool, Sony used two split pools, one of XDR and one of GDDR3, that moved data faster than the X360's solution but bottlenecked on capacity). Both CPUs descended from PowerPC architecture, but the Cell was a far more advanced variation with a good bit more power. The ATi GPU in the Xbox 360 was more powerful than the RSX put into the PS3.

End result was more or less comparable hardware with a slight edge to the PS3 since the gap between the CPUs was a good bit larger than the GPU gap. Developers who were entirely PS3 focused doing things on PS3 no one could achieve on Xbox 360 (Naughty Dog with the Uncharted series and most recently The Last of Us), but with X360 being far easier to program for and first on the market, it was easily the multi-plat target of choice with PS3 receiving ports (especially from the PC focused developers who never really got a handle on managing the PS3's split memory pools).

Now it's all x86, AMD/ATi build hadware running dev software based on Visual Studio. Making use of the hardware gap now is about as easy as developing a PC game to have medium, high, and ultra graphics settings, which almost every developer publishing on PC already does. The only real wrinkle thrown into this is just how much extra work it will take developers to get acceptable memory bandwidth out of the XB1's ESRAM/DDR3 set up while on PS4 and PC (thanks to on-board GDDR5 on all medium to high end GPUs) that won't be a problem.
Do you know what a dev kit is? It's basically a PC with the same console spec. You guys should be more worried about the PS4 crashing with a PS3 game.
Heyneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 09:12 AM   #499
Boobs McGee
I promise to stay alive
 
Boobs McGee's Avatar
 
till the day that I die

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Glendale
Posts: 5,002

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matty P
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willynowei View Post
Dev Kits are simply modified PC's. It's cheaper and less time consuming to just take an unoptimized game and throw it on a high-end PC than to spend time optimizing a segment of the game just for E3.

As for the rest of your posts, i'll take anonymous developer speculation with a grain of salt.
My knowledge of Dev kits is admittedly lacking, so clarify this for me: isn't the kit supposed to be an accurate representation of the system with which they're utilizing? You wouldn't develop games for a system that couldn't handle functions beyond it's capability, right?

As to the second part, I'm happy to take their speculation with a grain of salt, but am more inclined to read into it simply because of the intimacy THEY have with the systems, compared to what we the consumers have. There is USUALLY fire where smoke is found.

EDIT: Drek clarified above.
Boobs McGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 09:13 AM   #500
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 22,978

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Princes of Tara
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heyneck View Post
Do you know what a dev kit is? It's basically a PC with the same console spec. You guys should be more worried about the PS4 crashing with a PS3 game.
Are PS4's going to allow PS3 games to be ran on them?
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:19 AM.


Denver Broncos