Other Playstation 4

[rollo]

Its a win for AMD in one sence and in another its a lose. AMDs game development program has been sketchy at best some games they have branded run better under an Nvidia card. ( same applys to nvidias way its ment to be played program)

Nvidia could simply say they are releasing the next gen gpu in march / april and AMD has 0 ability to release a new gpu due to there manufacturing been filled up with console stuff.

If i was Nvidia chairman its what id be looking to do.

They are also massively behind on power consumption in the CPU area at the high end and until that changes i can not see people switching back over to AMD from intel rigs.

Truth is and always has been for the last few years, A 3 gen old Intel CPU is still quick enough for every game thats been released on the PC. Id be tempted to say the old q6600 is still quick enough with a high powered graphics card. ( if your playing witcher 2 or bf3 it is quick enough)

People with ivy and sandy rigs are not going to be upgrading for years if the development stays the same way with more and more items becoming gpu dependent.

AMD needs wins that are outside of Games to get there CPU devision back on track, Thats there main money maker. If they top performance with there next cpu in Adobe, Video editing tools, Music creation. These are all high dollar businesses that purchase the fastest cpus available.

In the markets where outright performance takes away any money concerns ( markets listed above are prime examples) AMD is a none player and has been a none player for a very long time. Comparing Intels top end cpu with AMD for pure performance is a funny graph gets worse when you overclock the Intel cpu. ( and gets even worse when you look at the power draw of a overclocked AMD cpu )

Server market has been reduced to the proxy 8% it currently stands at for AMD, Arm is catching them up in areas where servers matter ( Heat and power consumption mainly) they are also producing chips which can be packed in to increase the core count.

Its a good win for AMD but wether they will still be in existance next year is still highly questionable. They really do need to post a operating profit in the next 6months or you just wonder how much longer they will survive.

[ShinyAli]

Sony hold a big press event in NYC and the Sony CEO Andrew House talks for two hours about the PS4 and eventually...the new controller gets launched Not a PS4 in sight

Watch Sony PS4 on click here.

[Ayrto]

Originally Posted by ShinyAli

Sony hold a big press event in NYC and the Sony CEO Andrew House talks for two hours about the PS4 and eventually...the new controller gets launched Not a PS4 in sight

Watch Sony PS4 on click here.

The plastic case will probably look fine when it comes.

Specifications are all that matters really and they're quite impressive.

[Ayrto]

Originally Posted by Harlequin

heres a random thought:


why this is a win win for AMD

now the jaguar cpu is shaping up to be `modular` or at least this (and likely the xbox) implemenataion.

which means by default game coders will need to be working with AMD`s module CPU concept ; given sony announcement of DEV`s using the GPU section as they see fit - it could well be integers are run on cpu and far more complex FP`s are run compute on the much more efficient GPU.

can you see where this is going?

with BD and PD being quite good at integers , offloading most of the floating point work , via compute, to the GPU will be the best of all worlds.

so we then get ports to PC - and now by default the core of the game is specced to work best on AMD cpu`s.... now for the pc port more of the FP work will need to be `pulled back` to the cpu - but add nvidia cuda coding and you can still offload quite a bit to the GPU.


ergo , its now a in win for AMD. if anyone followed that rambling thought line ofc

Looks like it could drive change on PC .

I think many will still be surprised by the suggestion that the PS4 GPU , a GPU that's only slightly better than an 7850, can potentially be made to run in a way that makes it faster than Nvidia's latest, GK110 packing, Titan - because the pipeline is so inefficient on a Windows PC . It almost makes it difficult to understand the point in releasing ever better desktop PC GPUs, in the knowledge they'll be performance hobbled like that. I know there is no easy solution to the need for compatibility across different HW . But the current way of doing things is so needlessly wasteful in terms of GFLOPS per Watt. And as for SLI.

The fact that MS is so involved with promoting/selling its own console probably doesn't help PC gaming develop as it should either. A lot could depend on how the Xbox720[?] fares. If as reported, they bring out a vastly inferior console and put the emphasis on gimmicky Kinect, making it mandatory , plugged in at all times to function. Then Sony may win without having to do all that much at all.

[rollo]

if some genius rewrites direct x to be a better API with less overhead you never know what the future might hold in that reguard.

Till that time Direct x is the Axe to beat up gpus with.

[Harlequin]

its not hardware thats the issue on a pc - its games.

with macs and consoles ; the devs know exactly what hardware they have (or what variation) so can code directly for it, pushing its strenths and minimisng any weaknesses.

cant do that on a pc - especially when you get £30 GT430`s , up for £800 GTX Titans all being DX11 capable in a pc

[Ayrto]

Originally Posted by Harlequin

its not hardware thats the issue on a pc - its games.

with macs and consoles ; the devs know exactly what hardware they have (or what variation) so can code directly for it, pushing its strenths and minimisng any weaknesses.

cant do that on a pc - especially when you get £30 GT430`s , up for £800 GTX Titans all being DX11 capable in a pc

Yeah, that's probably true , devs complain , but they don't fully utilise DX11 as things stand either.

It's likely the min required specs games will need to run at all, are going to be bumped up dramatically anyway , once PS4 games start coming across , both in terms of GPU requirements and memory. And PC gamers are probably going to have to upgrade or... not play. Gimping PC games from PS4 versions is unlikely tol be an option either.

When PC was king and games studios adopted the next iteration of DirectX virtually straight away... PC was in a better state back then than it is now. You can't have the slowest boat dictating the speed of the convoy.

[rollo]

PC games already look far better than most console titles.

Games like Crysis 2 with texture addons and BF3, skyrim with mods will not be matched on a ps4 most likely.

The most likely thing that will change is memory you may see more 64bit applications enough i have my douts.

you have to remember the graphics card in the new console is probably more powerful than the Titan that has just been released on pc. Since they get a major buff from not using Direct x crap.

The slowest boat happens to be the biggest market over 150million units of ps3 and 360 why code for the pc games market which is not even 1/10th of it.

GTA4 the biggest selling console game was the worst port on earth when it was released on the pc.

[Cei]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...-tech-analysis

Ah, a proper look at graphics, not making guesses from compressed internet videos.

1080p capped at 30fps, but totally solid at that rate. I'm assuming this is a V-sync issue, as no drops usually means the engine is usually well past 30, but not quite hitting 60 solidly.

There are some curious cut-backs we didn't expect to see, but there's plenty of development time remaining until the game is finished, and with the bar being raised in almost every other category, it's perhaps inevitable that certain shortcomings - specific hangovers from the last generation - might rise to the surface. On the positive side, the push for higher-grade volumetric effects, masses of on-screen geometry, object-based motion blur, SSAO, and a full 1080p native frame-buffer all stand as the big selling points from a technical perspective in the here and now.

Based on specs alone, the PS4 clearly has far more to offer than what we're seeing, and it's worth remembering that Guerrilla would have developed a large chunk of Shadow Fall on incomplete hardware. Our understanding is that final kits based on actual PS4 production hardware are a relatively recent phenomenon, and now the developer has a fixed target to aim for, we may well see significant engine improvements. But if this stands as the level of technical quality we should expect for Shadow Fall's final release, we'll be due for one of the most technically compelling launch titles we've seen in a very long time.

In regards to the incomplete hardware, other places are reporting that the Killzone demo was sticking to the old specs - namely 4GB of RAM, with 512MB reserved for the OS. With Sony's 8GB bomb drop, we may well see a marked bump in performance/graphic effects over this.

[Parge]

Originally Posted by Cei

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...-tech-analysis

Ah, a proper look at graphics, not making guesses from compressed internet videos.

1080p capped at 30fps, but totally solid at that rate. I'm assuming this is a V-sync issue, as no drops usually means the engine is usually well past 30, but not quite hitting 60 solidly.



In regards to the incomplete hardware, other places are reporting that the Killzone demo was sticking to the old specs - namely 4GB of RAM, with 512MB reserved for the OS. With Sony's 8GB bomb drop, we may well see a marked bump in performance/graphic effects over this.

The opening line of that article annoys me.

"This is it. This is PlayStation 4. With the reveal of Killzone: Shadow Fall we have our first glimpse at real-time next-generation gameplay,"

1. It doesn't look any better than BF3, Star Citizen or anything built with the Crysis engine.
2. Its not a look at next gen gameplay - Killzone is a by the numbers FPS with almost no originality. Its a look at next generation console graphics.

[GoodBytes]

I don't know, there is a lot of issues with what I saw. Basic stuff that is standard since years ago on PC, is simply not there. I don't know if I mention this already but this is my analysis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqVN_O4CHWY
-> Building part, really impressive
-> At 0:50, look at the cover on the boxes as the helicopter lands.. it's moving in a pattern. This suggest no physics used, which is expected for "next-gen" levels of graphics.
-> 1:04, look at the background, where the buildings are, it's now flat, further they are, the more fog you have, and more flat they are (less polygons)
-> 1:20 (going down the stairs), the texture is very basic and simple
-> 1:56, the tiles on the floor are perfect, not even bump mapping is applied.
-> 3:22, where is the background building? The visuals close to you has been improved with some cool effects, but the building are gone
-> 4:51, the animation of the blue glass curve of the building is not longer smooth.. slow refresh rate to allow the console to handle the rest
-> 5:16, where are the building on the background, and the explosion animation looks like it's repeating itself (that means it's hard coded)
-> 5:50 to 6:10, Notice how the building magically appears slowly
-> 6:05-6:07 - look how the shipping that was completely not moving, now has a floating animation that just appeared. Also, I like the jump from very low detailed ship to high detail ship as the ship animates.
-> ~6:20, the cars are flat pictures.. but I'll give it pass, as that is actually to many polygon for even a PC
-> The entire scene of the guy holding the rope, you can see how nothing reflects in reality and uses Cube map (fake reflection) instead.
-> The building not so far away are low in polygons and the further ones have no textures to them.
-> 7:14, you can see even more the lack of bump mapping, which is noticible on the metal helicopter plates with holes, next to the door. Bump mapping is not very taxing, if you wonder, and is easy to implement.

[Cei]

That's the thing, I don't think games are going to look better than, say, BF3 on a high end rig. It's about that level of performance being available for console prices, rather than a PC costing £1k, and pushing up the bottom end of performance. I never thought the next consoles were going to be better than my PC, but they'd be a damn slight better than the current crop.

GB, you've already given us your analysis...based off a compressed Youtube video. Not to be offensive, but Digital Foundary a) do this for a living and b) used an Apple ProRes source that far exceeds the quality of a 1080p YouTube rip. I'm way more willing to trust them on this.

Plus, this is a work in progress. We're 10 months or so out from launch, pretty sure the rough edges can be smoothed off. There might indeed be the odd texture missing, or slightly dodgy, but they should sort it.

[Jedra]

Other than a few minutes of fancy graphics, are there any comments on the actual gameplay of this Killzone game? From what I saw it is is hard to actually tell what that is like given it took several minutes before the character became playable. Also there was not much of an idea as to how 'big' the playing space was.

There's not much point in all this analysis if the game itself is just like the last Killzone.

I would rather play something that was good at 'last gen' graphical levels than something dross at true 1080p.

[GoodBytes]

Originally Posted by Cei

GB, you've already given us your analysis...based off a compressed Youtube video. Not to be offensive, but Digital Foundary a) do this for a living and b) used an Apple ProRes source that far exceeds the quality of a 1080p YouTube rip. I'm way more willing to trust them on this.

You can look at the same footage on Digital Foundary which you link, my points still stands. In fact it proves them more so as you better see what I am saying. The site is highlight performance. I am highlight the lack of basic effects that is the norm for PC games. I don't mind not having it on the XBox 3 or WiiU as they come in front of you face and go: "We have the best graphics", kind of attitude, and people are buying wat Sony is saying "WOW 8GB of RAM.. GDDR5 I don't know what it is, but it sounds cool and a lot, so it must be technology of the future!"

Plus, this is a work in progress. We're 10 months or so out from launch, pretty sure the rough edges can be smoothed off. There might indeed be the odd texture missing, or slightly dodgy, but they should sort it.

I agree. I haven't taken any decision on weather I will buy a PS4, or WiiU or XBox 3, yet. I have money for one console, I want to see games...so I guess at E3 I'll take my decision.

Originally Posted by Jedra

Other than a few minutes of fancy graphics, are there any comments on the actual gameplay of this Killzone game? From what I saw it is is hard to actually tell what that is like given it took several minutes before the character became playable.

No info that I have found. It looks like we have to wait for E3.

Also there was not much of an idea as to how 'big' the playing space was.
There's not much point in all this analysis if the game itself is just like the last Killzone.

Its not analysis on the game. It's analysis on the capability of the PS4 which are over hyped, and defined to be higher than reality.

When I saw what Nintendo had to show with the WiiU including the cool gorgeous demo of the system capabilities, I was like: yup, looks about right, in the sense that it has everything you expect, no cheap trick to make it look better than what it actually is. Its was impressive considering that specs of the system.

I would rather play something that was good at 'last gen' graphical levels than something dross at true 1080p.

Same here.

[Jedra]

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

Its not analysis on the game. It's analysis on the capability of the PS4 which are over hyped, and defined to be higher than reality.

I get that, I am just having a moan that Sony seem to have managed to get people talking about the specs of their machine rather than the actual content that is being developed for it - which is what they wanted I guess.

Anyway, I'm off to play ZombieU for a bit. Next gen gaming the way it was supposed to be!

[rollo]

I have said on these forums for months that the next gen consoles will not push the bounds for pc games and been slaughtered because of it.

That video basically proves everything I've said is correct.

Compare bf 3 to that kill zone and bf3 is a lot better.

It will take 2-3 years for console graphics to hit bf3 the first released games and for up to 2 years after launch always look rather shoddy.

In 2-3 years the next gen consoles might be pushing the pcs to a higher place but on release they look like been far from it so far.

Unless the games are running at max memory on the 4gb test system ( which seems unlikely going off the above) 8gb is going to be used even less till the developers learn the system.

Specs are great but they don't magically make better graphics.

[Sloth]

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

-> 4:51, the animation of the blue glass curve of the building is not longer smooth.. slow refresh rate to allow the console to handle the rest

Maybe I'm mistaken since looking at minute and largely irrelevant background details during action sequences isn't a hobby of mine, but isn't the system simply damaged and that effect is intentional?

[GoodBytes]

I guess. It is a possibility.

[TheStockBroker]

UK console release pricing: £399, with games at £69.99 apiece

[Plugs]

Don't put too much thought into those prices. They are likely just placeholders so they can get preorders flowing.