Console Wars Thread! PS4 vs. Xbox One vs. Wii U Fight!

COD is one of the worsts things you can try to make a comparisons when it comes to graphics. This is even on PC at max settings.

 

And I essentially stated as much. Nevertheless, there were similar cases last gen (CoD in general has always been a bit of a mess), but none with gaps like that on PS3/360 AFAIK. But whatever....throw that example out if you wish. The rest sill applies.


You seem to be ignoring my overall point and just trying to refute minor things, just for the sake of disagreeing. I can see your point about how the difference isn't that significant, especially coming from the realm of a PC gamer. A Radeon 290x vs a Radeon 7850 is much more significant than a Radeon 7850 vs a Radeon 7770. If that's your point, I don't disagree. But if you're trying to state that this gap is comparable to the PS3/360 gap (systems with roughly the same overall GFLOPs, instead of 50%+ more power in one console), I don't really agree.

 

Hardware means nothing (or isn't the most important piece of the puzzle). What is important is that you build a platform that developers can easily harness the full potential of. No one makes better development tools than Microsoft, no one. That is one reason the Xbox 360's clearly inferior hardware hung with PS3, because Microsoft had the best development platform. I see it being no different between PS4 and Xbox One.

Only time will tell.

 

Not true. The cpu in the 360 was a derivative of the Cell and their GPU was a lot better than PS3's. Software issues aside, this is why the majority of multiplatform games looked better on the 360. Programmers had to work around the weak GPU on the PS3 and use the cells spu to try and offset it.

 

Please explain how Xbox 360 had clearly inferior hardware.

By all accounts, it sounds like Sony actually is ahead of Microsoft in terms of ease of development. I might put that entirely on the ESRAM though (MS seems to still be working out ways to use it efficiently, and when that is all worked out, things will probably be easier for devs). Even if that is the case, I find it odd for Sony to be better, all else equal, so I'd expect MS to catch up and probably surpass Sony over time. Though honestly, the designs are so similar (and also very dev-friendly themselves), I'm not sure it will matter as much this time around. PS3 was a freaking nightmare in that regard, that's for sure.

 

It's not a gimmick at all...I use it every single day with no issues.

 

What gaps are we seeing this generation?

Forza is 1080p at 60 fps. Ryse also has some incredible graphics, as good as anything present on the PS4 so far.

If you are talking about just multiplatform games, if anything, I see the gap lessening as developing for the XBO might require some time to get around any issues the developers have been having early in the generation. Again, just because COD was running at 720 on the xbox doesnt mean that the system is incapable of getting to 900 or 1080....it may just take a little time for a team like Infinity Ward to figure it out.

The gap I see so far this generation is that the Xbox crowd is enjoying graphical prowess of games like Ryse and Forza, while the PS4 crowd is cheering about Resogun and Flower.

 

It sounds more like a compatibility issue if it's not working with his receiver.

 

Just based on reading all the comments on here and other websites, I just imagine PS4 fanboys being people that have no friends or family to play with and just play videogames online by themselves while jerking off to graphics and sales numbers.

I don't have either system and don't plan on spending that much money on one anytime soon (mainly use my 360 for netflix) but it's funny seeing the vitriol they spew towards another system just to prop their purchase up.

 

PS4>XBox one

 

I'm looking foward for Valve's console. So I can enjoy the deep discounted games.

 

It seems like people are trying to say the PS4 is a Porsche and the Xbox One is a Toyota. And, I paid more for the Toyota when I could have had a Porsche. But, the speed limit prevents me from driving the Porsche as fast as I want.

 

I will buy this game along with Mario world 3D for the Wii U at Toys r us. Since they have Buy 1 get 1 30% off. Also is it too late to upgrade my COD ghost from 360 to Xbox one for $10 and how does that work?

 

I actually don't like using launch games. It is the weakest evidence IMO, given all the variables. I prefer using the raw numbers, but then you get "well, it is better on paper, but we'll see when the games come out." So when the raw numbers and the actual games indicate one thing, I think perhaps it is time to accept reality.

I do agree that apparently MS is having problems with their tools and drivers. I don't believe we know how to quantify that exactly though. I doubt Sony has everything nailed down with their tools, and they'll certainly be improving things over time (much like MS will try to leverage their ESRAM, Sony will try to leverage their compute advantage). This is definitely a factor, but how big of one? Difficult to say.

On a side note, where was it confirmed that Madden wasn't 1080p or 60FPS? I can't find hard info one way or the other, but the Google seemed to imply it was 1080p and 60 FPS. It should be.

It was OK, though not as technical as I'd like. I still prefer Anand's thoughts (and his was just a mini-review):
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7528/the-xbox-one-mini-review-hardware-analysis/2
It seems few articles point out the difference in ROPs between the GPUs, which is likely the main reason for resolution/AA differences in these early games.

Multiplatform games are really the only way to judge this (and again, I'd prefer just raw numbers, but people don't like those). You can make a game support whatever resolution you want (within reason), but it will come with some trade-offs. PS3 and 360 can both do 1080p @ 60 FPS, but that comes with trade-offs. Obviously, no one is claiming there isn't a gap between the PS3 and PS4 because both can do 1080p @ 60 FPS. Run the same game on both platforms, and you might start to see some huge differences (although I suppose in this specific example, developers might just lock the PS4 version at 60 FPS, though it would likely run at 120FPS/240FPS if unlocked, assuming the CPU could keep up).

The raw numbers seem to suggest it is easier to support higher resolutions (and better AA) on one platform compared to the other, and so far, the games themselves seem to indicate that as well. Is this all a coincidence? Maybe so. I guess we'll just have to wait and see (though I wonder if we'll always be "waiting").

Just to reiterate what I've said earlier, none of this might mean much in the overall picture. Titanfall seems to be targeting 720p on XBO. You know what it is targeting on PS4? 0p. So much for that resolution advantage.

 

THEY'RE THE SAME DAMN HARDWARE. You can't talk about one system and not have it relate to the other. They're just PC. Simple as that.

 

So which games are 1080p 60fps on either console?

 

I find it odd this isn't mentioned anywhere from what I can tell. Reviewers usually make a big deal out of this. I can see missing frame drops (from 60 to 45ish), but locked 30 seems pretty bad.

I'm nitpicking, but just surprised by that, especially since there seems to be conflicting information online from some quick searches I did (maybe I just missed the confirmation).

Might be a better/more accurate list out there somewhere, but this seems OK for now:
http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates
Seems to be missing some games though. IIRC, Warframe is supposed to be 1080p 60 FPS, but it rarely stays at 60 FPS. Definitely needs a lot more optimization on the framerate side of things. Locked 30 might be better.