Nextbox rumors..

Tkyl wrote:

In that regards, while the PS4 does have half the memory of the Xbox (from leaked specs), the the memory on the Playstation is much quicker than that on the Xbox. Also, keep in mind that the Playstation OS is setup to require a lot less memory than the Xbox OS is going to reserve. Plus, once you hit 4 GB memory, extra memory is not as valuable as the speed of that memory (Currently.) With all that said, my co-worker and I (both graphics programmers) are leaning towards the PS4 as being the better platform (from a purely performance standpoint.)

Yeah, that makes sense. What I'm hearing from artists who are working with the dev hardware is that they wish PS4 had more memory.

I think we can all agree that the big winner here is AMD, who is selling essentially the same hardware to both Sony and MS for their new consoles.

The thing with memory is that I'm not sure how much it really matters. If development happens similar to this-gen, lowest-common-denominator hardware will just have the platforms with more RAM sitting unfilled.

Tkyl wrote:
Podunk wrote:

I love how in their story on the PS4 specs, they're all like, 'the PS4 only has half as much RAM as Xbox on paper but you never know, that will probably change, so PS4 is the clear winner."

In that regards, while the PS4 does have half the memory of the Xbox (from leaked specs), the the memory on the Playstation is much quicker than that on the Xbox. Also, keep in mind that the Playstation OS is setup to require a lot less memory than the Xbox OS is going to reserve. Plus, once you hit 4 GB memory, extra memory is not as valuable as the speed of that memory (Currently.) With all that said, my co-worker and I (both graphics programmers) are leaning towards the PS4 as being the better platform (from a purely performance standpoint.)

Just like the PS3 was in this generation, eh? And did it matter?

S0LIDARITY wrote:
Mr GT Chris wrote:

If it's true then MS can blow me. PS4 sold.

I have to imagine that M$ does focus testing. M$ would have heard this right away and trust that they want to avoid alienating a large portion of their market.

IMAGE(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4wBaxBEgN_4/UFX3spnm8mI/AAAAAAAADAs/dZUV_vOexi8/s1600/oprah-shakng-her-head.gif)

Scratched wrote:

The thing with memory is that I'm not sure how much it really matters. If development happens similar to this-gen, lowest-common-denominator hardware will just have the platforms with more RAM sitting unfilled.

That was the usual case but sometimes the PC version would make use of it, like having 64 players in Battlefield 3. Skyrim also didn't quite work on the PS3 because of the RAM limit.

Gumbie wrote:
S0LIDARITY wrote:
Mr GT Chris wrote:

If it's true then MS can blow me. PS4 sold.

I have to imagine that M$ does focus testing. M$ would have heard this right away and trust that they want to avoid alienating a large portion of their market.

IMAGE(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4wBaxBEgN_4/UFX3spnm8mI/AAAAAAAADAs/dZUV_vOexi8/s1600/oprah-shakng-her-head.gif)

Didn't realize that M$ wasn't a socially acceptable abbreviation for Microsoft. I guess I'll go with stock tickers from now on.

You could just say Microsoft.

Or $ony. And don't forget your Nintendo$ and Apple$.

It's acceptable, so long as you don't mind being ridiculed.

chaz wrote:

Or $ony. And don't forget your Nintendo$ and Apple$.

More like NinYENdo. I got nothing for SNE or AAPL. MSFT could be M$FT I guess, but I'll stick with NYSE standards for now.

€picGames

€idos?

S0LIDARITY wrote:

Didn't realize that M$ wasn't a socially acceptable abbreviation for Microsoft. I guess I'll go with stock tickers from now on.

It's generally used in "fan boy" style arguments more than people trying to have reasonable discussions. Not saying that's how you used it, but I rarely see it used when things aren't at least starting to go south.

MannishBoy wrote:
S0LIDARITY wrote:

Didn't realize that M$ wasn't a socially acceptable abbreviation for Microsoft. I guess I'll go with stock tickers from now on.

It's generally used in "fan boy" style arguments more than people trying to have reasonable discussions. Not saying that's how you used it, but I rarely see it used when things aren't at least starting to go south.

In my mind, M$ always represented Microsoft Corporate as an entity. Where MS was representative of product suites.

MannishBoy wrote:
S0LIDARITY wrote:

Didn't realize that M$ wasn't a socially acceptable abbreviation for Microsoft. I guess I'll go with stock tickers from now on.

It's generally used in "fan boy" style arguments more than people trying to have reasonable discussions. Not saying that's how you used it, but I rarely see it used when things aren't at least starting to go to Cleveland.

FTFY

Tkyl wrote:
Podunk wrote:

I love how in their story on the PS4 specs, they're all like, 'the PS4 only has half as much RAM as Xbox on paper but you never know, that will probably change, so PS4 is the clear winner."

In that regards, while the PS4 does have half the memory of the Xbox (from leaked specs), the the memory on the Playstation is much quicker than that on the Xbox. Also, keep in mind that the Playstation OS is setup to require a lot less memory than the Xbox OS is going to reserve. Plus, once you hit 4 GB memory, extra memory is not as valuable as the speed of that memory (Currently.) With all that said, my co-worker and I (both graphics programmers) are leaning towards the PS4 as being the better platform (from a purely performance standpoint.)

I'm sorry this is a giant /facepalm. You are making these statements on leaks...we all have short memories I guess since the PS3 was a shadow of its former self once the rumors (sometimes from Sony themselves) materialized into reality (I'm still waiting for my content to age into 1080P)

Lets take a step back and await the actual release systems before we make sweeping statements. Let alone declare one to be a better platform. Haven't we yet realized that paper stats don't exactly paint the clear picture especially when it comes to closed systems like a console.

TheCounselor wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
S0LIDARITY wrote:

Didn't realize that M$ wasn't a socially acceptable abbreviation for Microsoft. I guess I'll go with stock tickers from now on.

It's generally used in "fan boy" style arguments more than people trying to have reasonable discussions. Not saying that's how you used it, but I rarely see it used when things aren't at least starting to go to Cleveland.

FTFY

It's immature and doesn't really make any sense. Oh, Microsoft wants to make money? THE HORROR!

Time to call me £iQUIDmanti$ then.

GG, were it from anyone else I would agree with you, but considering who Tkyl works for, I wouldn't be so dismissive.

Ulairi wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:
Aaron D. wrote:

Tin-foil hats are being donned.

Oh, but the first Tweet is the best:

"'The next Xbox won't allow used games? Screw that, I'll buy a Steambox instead.' - ACTUAL UNIRONIC COMMENTS ON THAT EDGE RUMOR PIECE."

Steam box has the benefit of Steam. Xbox doesn't.

Yeah, as much as I hate to suck the fun out of some good irony, that's my first reaction too: edging towards PC gaming as my primary platform (where of course Steam DRM is only on some many most games).

The second Edge article also makes that point:

There’s good reason no-one really cares that you can’t trade in Steam and App Store games – often, they’re so cheap it barely seems worth the bother.

So everyone is leaving the Power architecture this generation except Nintendo? I assume that means backwards compatibility will be difficult to non-existent.

cube wrote:

GG, were it from anyone else I would agree with you, but considering who Tkyl works for, I wouldn't be so dismissive.

I realize every major Dev has either a Dev kit running on baseline hardware and or a reasonable set of levels to build against but even then final specs relative to developer systems and shipping can be different. As well we won't know the real vs relative strengths of the hardware until 2-3 years in. No dev is putting out their best in a new system until a few years in.

MeatMan wrote:

Statements like that make me give no credence to any of these Edge articles.

You say that like it was a possibility.

Mr GT Chris wrote:

If it's true then MS can blow me. PS4 sold.

I'd buy the PS4 eventually anyway, if Sony continues to not be stupid.

Scratched wrote:
Chaz wrote:

I can't imagine that MS would cut out a fairly large portion of its potential market like that.

As much as I don't like the idea, I'm sure MS has usage stats to back up what they're doing. Another factor would be that they know a new console will be adopted by different audiences over it's lifespan, so perhaps initially affluent people for whom a reliable internet connection is not a problem, but down the road 'the poors' will also get one. There's movements in countries around the world that believe an internet connection should be a right.

Quality and speed of connection is another matter.

That could be, but I imagine it more likely that they are going to target the Nextbox to exactly one audience and feel the smaller market can provide sufficient margin if they get a large percentage. OTOH, given their penchant for wanting to be the home entertainment center, it either means what I just said is incredibly stupid or they'll have two different products, one for gaming (always online) and one media hub.

DSGamer wrote:

So everyone is leaving the Power architecture this generation except Nintendo? I assume that means backwards compatibility will be difficult to non-existent.

Nintendo is always playing with Power. [size=1]Sorry....[/size]

As for backwards compatibility, the machines could have an embedded PPC processor for backwards compatibility (a la 60GB PS3), or run using a GaiKai-style service. Given that the vast minority of any given game is actual compiled code, would it be possible for Microsoft/Sony to recompile the various application binaries comprising a game and deliver it to one of the new consoles as a form of "title update" to run on x86/x64 hardware, assuming all of the byte-heavy media files wouldn't need any conversion at all? But presumably, the sticking factor wouldn't be the CPU itself, but rather all of the other hardware differences; heck, it may not even use the same disk/disc filesystem, let alone the arrangement of files on that filesystem. That said, there may be a chance for backwards compatibility libraries to handle a lot of these differences -- and IMHO Microsoft is in a pretty good position, given its history with Windows, to know how to build really backwards-compatible library structures.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

TheGameguru wrote:
Tkyl wrote:
Podunk wrote:

I love how in their story on the PS4 specs, they're all like, 'the PS4 only has half as much RAM as Xbox on paper but you never know, that will probably change, so PS4 is the clear winner."

In that regards, while the PS4 does have half the memory of the Xbox (from leaked specs), the the memory on the Playstation is much quicker than that on the Xbox. Also, keep in mind that the Playstation OS is setup to require a lot less memory than the Xbox OS is going to reserve. Plus, once you hit 4 GB memory, extra memory is not as valuable as the speed of that memory (Currently.) With all that said, my co-worker and I (both graphics programmers) are leaning towards the PS4 as being the better platform (from a purely performance standpoint.)

I'm sorry this is a giant /facepalm. You are making these statements on leaks...we all have short memories I guess since the PS3 was a shadow of its former self once the rumors (sometimes from Sony themselves) materialized into reality (I'm still waiting for my content to age into 1080P)

Lets take a step back and await the actual release systems before we make sweeping statements. Let alone declare one to be a better platform. Haven't we yet realized that paper stats don't exactly paint the clear picture especially when it comes to closed systems like a console.

Of course my statements are based purely upon the information at hand. And if the specs turn out to be different than what has been stated currently, I would be happy to revise my assessment. But I feel it is perfectly acceptable to consider the possibility that the leaks are true until a future point when they are shown not to be.

Certis wrote:

I think the 360 has sold roughly 70 million units and last number Microsoft tossed out for live users (gold and silver) was around 40 million. Allowing for a wide margin of error, that's a lot of non-internet users there.

THe doesn't account for people rebuying consoles due to RRD's...

although i would agree with you, that's still a large portion.

Personally I don't have an issue with the idea as it wouldn't affect me that much.

AP Erebus wrote:
Certis wrote:

I think the 360 has sold roughly 70 million units and last number Microsoft tossed out for live users (gold and silver) was around 40 million. Allowing for a wide margin of error, that's a lot of non-internet users there.

THe doesn't account for people rebuying consoles due to RRD's...

although i would agree with you, that's still a large portion.

Personally I don't have an issue with the idea as it wouldn't affect me that much.

The 360 didn't have built in wifi for until the recent revisions. So a lot of those people may have had internet, but didn't bother to wire it up, or pay extra for a wifi adapter. In 2010, 71% of US households had home internet access, but I'd bet well over 90% of households that have an XBox also have internet.

I was just thinking that if they want to make it internet only, they should work to roll out broadband by affecting government policy.
Then I remembered that to become the media hub they want, they've made lots of deals with content providers and probably some ISP's and many of those content providers also make deals with ISP's, so they're hosed if they try.

TheGameguru wrote:
Aaron D. wrote:

EDGE Pt. Duex: Risky business: the next Xbox versus PlayStation 4

So now they've spun their initial rumor into a NextBox vs. PS4 analysis, with Sony being the "simple choice".

wow ouch..

Based on our sources’ information, we are building an ever clearer picture of what PlayStation 4 and the next Xbox will be. Right now, there seems to be a subtle role reversal happening; Microsoft’s stricter, more complex box aspires to be the complete entertainment superhub PS3 was once designed to be. Sony’s PlayStation 4 is more PC-like and developer-friendly, as Xbox once was.

They have basically nothing to back this up.. its 100% speculation... but hey its an "ever clearer" picture.

As Sony Computer Entertainment warms up its blue lighting and double-checks its playlist for February 20th, one unnamed SCE official says that the PlayStation 4 will act as more of a home entertainment hub than what we've seen in the past. They added, according to the Nikkei, that the main selling point won't be the rumored eight-core AMD64 CPU or other hardware specs, but how it opens up new styles of play -- something Nintendo is also focusing on. Sony is going to push the new console as a home entertainment "nerve center," with a focus on the hardware's ability to connect and share to mobile devices -- the rival that's pulling gamers away from traditional consoles.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/08/s...

/facepalm

I like how a new CPU suddenly enables all that. Sure, there's certain minimums, but I seem to remember devices connecting to other devices for a while now.