or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › The Official Xbox One thread...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Xbox One thread... - Page 258

post #7711 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post

Care to explain how you are more of an authority than Penello? I'm curious. I mean, if you say he's wrong you can't just use a hand waving argument to prove it.

All Penello is doing is waving his hand, so I'm not quite sure what kind of answer you're looking for.
post #7712 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

I just don't see the point of what they're trying to accomplish, especially when the MSM and gaming press has pretty much put both consoles at the same exact level (even if they're not).

Especially since they're going off approved messaging and don't have authority or want to own the system and talk about the specs, philosophy and technical aspects of their launch games.
And you know they're off approved messaging....how? You don't get to just make things up and expect everyone to accept it as fact. Do you think they just let him off the reservation to say whatever he wants? That's highly unlikely. Sony and Microsoft are both carefully choreographing every snippet of information that is released. They're going on some kind of offensive but to what end remains to be seen. I just think it is unlikely that they'd outright lie about it. That would only make matters worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

All Penello is doing is waving his hand, so I'm not quite sure what kind of answer you're looking for.
Well, that's the point. You can't dispute him without more information. Let's wait and see what he says (he did say a more techie explanation would be forthcoming).
post #7713 of 14802
Sorry, should have been "they're using the approved messaging".

My point is not much is going to be gained, because they won't be going off script and give the info and assurances people want.

Being frank and going off script is actually what they need; they need to level and gain some credence back. Because the PR has been thoroughly discredited and called into question. Trying to put out that fire only causes others to pop up.
post #7714 of 14802
He's not saying anything that some of our own members haven't said in the past, it's an old debate to which he's adding nothing new.
post #7715 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Sorry, should have been "they're using the approved messaging".

My point is not much is going to be gained, because they won't be going off script and give the info and assurances people want.

Being frank and going off script is actually what they need; they need to level and gain some credence back. Because the PR has been thoroughly discredited and called into question. Trying to put out that fire only causes others to pop up.
Well, I somewhat agree. They're not going to go off script, that much is for certain. They just need to get a better script. He's hinted at some possibilities but they should have waited to do the full court press until they had an actual ball to run with. They're acting like there is some kind of NDA, but its obviously not a dgpu (the prospect of which was lol anyway). All they're accomplishing right now is fanning the flames of speculation and that might not be their best move.
post #7716 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post

Well, I somewhat agree. They're not going to go off script, that much is for certain. They just need to get a better script. He's hinted at some possibilities but they should have waited to do the full court press until they had an actual ball to run with. They're acting like there is some kind of NDA, but its obviously not a dgpu (the prospect of which was lol anyway). All they're accomplishing right now is fanning the flames of speculation and that might not be their best move.

I don't think they're acting like there's some sort of NDA. I think they're just playing off the fact that they have a complicated memory architecture that makes it difficult to compare directly, and assuming everyone they're talking to doesn't already know that. (Which may very well be true.)

They're taking advantage of the fact that they're not directly comparable in a few ways to try and convince people that its impossible to compare them at all.
post #7717 of 14802
I don't think there's a NDA, just a long running plan they still want to execute and a corporate fear of the unknown. That isn't just a MS trait, and the wagons are probably more circled now than they were in the original plan. But that can be self defeating.

I guess my point is that a lot of the highlighted stats were questionable from the start, such a RAM bandwidth being added together (bad) and an oranges comparing it to the competitions bandwidth on one bus. People over there are now asking for clarification, and if he can't provide how they got to that number, why and how it benefits the system, it looks bad. He's getting sucked into a personal conversation with a community where before these were just PR blurbs thrown out in articles that didn't have to worry about backing up their nice sounding assertions.

And lets face it, it's not like most of gaming journalism knows nearly half as much about the tech as the some of the people over at neogaf do. They don't push back when stuff doesn't make sense, because they have no clue.

So they better be ready to talk on the level expected, otherwise this is going to become a news story in itself IMO. And it won't be a good one.
post #7718 of 14802

Here's his list of specific points:

 

Quote:
18 CU's vs. 12 CU's =/= 50% more performance. Multi-core processors have inherent inefficiency with more CU's, so it's simply incorrect to say 50% more GPU. 

 

12CUs is no small amount of graphics cores either, and is subject to inefficiency as well. Even if it shakes out to 40% more GPU in the end due to rising inefficiency, its still much more capacity.

 

 

Quote:

Adding to that, each of our CU's is running 6% faster. It's not simply a 6% clock speed increase overall.

 

Doesnt even come close to closing the gap.

 

 

Quote:
We have more memory bandwidth. 176gb/sec is peak on paper for GDDR5. Our peak on paper is 272gb/sec. (68gb/sec DDR3 + 204gb/sec on ESRAM). ESRAM can do read/write cycles simultaneously so I see this number mis-quoted.

 

That's just as much of a theoretical paper spec as Sony's number, with one massive distinction being that Sony's number applies to the entire 8GB bank of memory, while MS's applies to a measly 32MB esram cache. 

 

Quote:
We have at least 10% more CPU. Not only a faster processor, but a better audio chip also offloading CPU cycles.

 

The CPU is becoming more and more irrelevant as each day goes by, and unlike graphics, you can't scale a game engine easily to use more CPU time. So Sony's slower CPU will force devs to aim for the lowest common denominator on the CPU, whereas it's a piece of cake to turn up the resolution or certain effects up a notch and soak up all of the PS4's extra GPU capacity. 
 

Quote:
We understand GPGPU and its importance very well. Microsoft invented Direct Compute, and have been using GPGPU in a shipping product since 2010 - it's called Kinect. 

 

I guess the implication here is that no one else in the world understands GPGPU? Kind of a crazy statement to make. 

 

Quote:
Speaking of GPGPU - we have 3X the coherent bandwidth for GPGPU at 30gb/sec which significantly improves our ability for the CPU to efficiently read data generated by the GPU.

And they've got 50% less GPU capacity to actually run the GPGPU code....so big whoop.

 

 

 

Even taken all together, it's not enough to overcome the sheer brute force advantage that the PS4 has. He's treating it like it's some sort of victory that there isn't a 50% gap, like a 30% gap is some sort of win.  

 

Whether or not that advantage results in a difference you'll care about is a whole other debate, but he should let the games do the talking, because he's only making things worse. Games will still look great on the Xbox One, and honestly a LOT of people simply arent going to notice or care about the difference. All he's doing is reminding them that it exists.


Edited by bd2003 - 9/9/13 at 9:14pm
post #7719 of 14802
I'll just be glad when these systems come out. The back and forth and rumors and bickering here and there get tiring. I just want systems to play games and use for other features. I don't care what specific specs each one has. I want to see what will be used on both systems and how they will integrate into the home. And I would guess that the vast majority of people that will use the next gen systems also don't care about specifics either.
post #7720 of 14802
Yeah it has been frustrating trying to figure out how the 2 systems will compare. Guess I'll have to wait for some good post launch unbiased reviews and comparisons.
post #7721 of 14802
The funny thing is... every response to what he's saying kinda' proves his point. People are trying to make apples-to-apples comparisons between two differing architectures, even if there are similarities in how both started, and treating it like you would a PC debate. If there's anything we know about specialized hardware, that's just not the whole story, even if you show greater potential from several links in the chain. I see pros and cons with both systems, but even then, I don't have all the data to make snap judgments about which is more efficient at what it does. And regardless, something as simple as providing more robust libraries to developers could make the actual differences irrelevant. Ultimately, all of that really only matters to developers, so they can get the most out of each platform.

Do I think we'll see a difference? Sure. Do I think it will be like the current generation, where places like Digital Foundry are having to do side-by-side comparisons for us to see real tangible differences between the two? Pretty much. And at that point, the system with the better features becomes more important to me... just as it did with the current generation of consoles. Xbox Live alone ensures that the Xbox One will have the better experience for my particular needs, not to mention my interest in both Kinect 2 and how they'll use Azure. That's not a knock on what Sony is doing (which I'm also interested in, even if their launch lineup doesn't wow me at all)... Just a statement of what matters to me more than all this internet dick-measuring that people seem to be so enthralled by. And it seems like there's no satisfying people anyway, because people complain about them not saying anything, then keep complaining when they start speaking up. Doesn't mean they shouldn't try though.
post #7722 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Here's his list of specific points:

That's just as much of a theoretical paper spec as Sony's number, with one massive distinction being that Sony's number applies to the entire 8GB bank of memory, while MS's applies to a measly 32MB esram cache. 

It's late so I won't address your entire post, but I will tackle this one. what's feeding the GPU is the ESRAM, not regular system RAM. As long as the ESRAM keeps the GPU fully busy and occupied (because that's where you lose the efficiency; a GPU that sits around waiting for data is doing nothing and thus losing performance), that's all that matters. It's doing its job. They've had multiple demos at Build 2013 such as the tiled resources demo which was streaming 9 GB of data in realtime through an artificially created 16MB graphics card with great framerate and incredible details. Megatexturing is going to be huge this generation. We already saw some of the stunning graphics of Rage (too bad the game itself wasn't as good as the graphics) and that was on the 360 and it was done through software by the inecredibly awesome Carmack. I can't wait to see the power of hardware megatexturing for this next generation.
post #7723 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post


It's late so I won't address your entire post, but I will tackle this one. what's feeding the GPU is the ESRAM, not regular system RAM. As long as the ESRAM keeps the GPU fully busy and occupied (because that's where you lose the efficiency; a GPU that sits around waiting for data is doing nothing and thus losing performance), that's all that matters. It's doing its job. They've had multiple demos at Build 2013 such as the tiled resources demo which was streaming 9 GB of data in realtime through an artificially created 16MB graphics card with great framerate and incredible details. Megatexturing is going to be huge this generation. We already saw some of the stunning graphics of Rage (too bad the game itself wasn't as good as the graphics) and that was on the 360 and it was done through software by the inecredibly awesome Carmack. I can't wait to see the power of hardware megatexturing for this next generation.

 

Even so, it's still keeping a much smaller GPU busy and occupied. I've always said the X1 will still be capable of great things, it's just a struggle to find any one area where it has the PS4 beat hands down. That's what makes the comparison so easy this time around. You could look at a PS3 and 360, and find multiple ways each one is superior to the other. You look at these two, and you simply see one that's more capable than the other in every way that matters. Really the only area where it's clearly ahead is the CPU, and it's got the SHAPE processor to offload even more from the CPU...but what's the CPU even doing anymore, that isn't done better by a GPU?

 

Best case scenario, the X1 can keep up with the PS4 and there isnt any difference at all. The majority of the time, I expect the differences will be minor that just like Jeremy says, you will need a side by side to spot them. And I'm even more certain that the vast majority of people won't care, nor do I think it'll have any real effect sales wise.  

 

It's only going to be a meaningful distinction to a relatively small crowd....but it just so happens that AVS is one of those places where that crowd gathers.


Edited by bd2003 - 9/10/13 at 4:12am
post #7724 of 14802
Maybe it's just me, but when we get into these discussions and people start asking things like "what's the CPU even doing anymore, that isn't done better by a GPU?"... I hope it's the things that really matter, but aren't easy to see. Think about it... Even in the current gen systems, we have some freakin' gorgeous looking games with fantastic sound. Sheer eye candy. But what do those games almost always seem to bring along for the ride? Half-assed physics... stupid AI... character pathing that makes NPCs walk into the level geometry and get stuck there. And that's largely because developers tend to focus on the visual wow factor to draw in buyers, just like TVs in most retail showrooms are cranked to their brightest but least accurate mode to make them stand out.

We've talked before in this thread about how the 1080p render target means we're essentially hitting a point of diminishing returns as far as graphics go, wherein the majority may ultimately think, "Oh, that looks better... but not new console better." You could argue that now, even with such a basic comparison as Forza 5 and GT6 on the PS3 (which is a testament to the power of the current gen consoles as they've found their stride). So where is all this newfound CPU power going to go? It's my hope that we're looking at a fundamental change for the better in gaming. These new console architectures will advance the use of multiple CPU cores greatly, even as far as the PC side goes, where games are currently using them... but not really, and not in earnest because PC games have to support the lower end of the CPU spectrum as well. Hopefully, this spare power in both the next gen consoles and in the current batch of PC CPUs can start to make next gen games more reactive and more intelligent - not just shinier. I think stuff like Forza 5's AI profiling is a good start, but I hope that this kind of use of the CPU power doesn't end there. We all know they can make games look beautiful... Now it's time to make them PLAY beautifully too.

So get on that ****, developers. biggrin.gif
post #7725 of 14802
Lol, that's a lot of hope. tongue.gif

With the amount of 30fps games we're seeing, I wouldn't get my hopes too high that there will be an industry wide sea change towards playability over presentation. I'm sure gameplay will continually improve over next gen just the same, but I don't think it's tech that's holding them back in that regard anyway.
post #7726 of 14802
Now for the real question!

Will Xbox/Sony be at CEATEC in Japan? Any of you guys familiar with that show? I am hoping they will make an appearance, but since TGS is so close in dates, thinking maybe not. Website mentions that "game consoles" in general can make an appearance, but that seems kind of vague. Thanks for any inside info, if anyone has visited CEATEC in the past.

http://www.ceatec.com/en/

Only Sony is mentioned so far in exhibitors, but that doesn't sound game specific.

My timing sucks! I could have been there for TGS, but random date chosen and I end up with CEATEC mad.gif
post #7727 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Lol, that's a lot of hope. tongue.gif

With the amount of 30fps games we're seeing, I wouldn't get my hopes too high that there will be an industry wide sea change towards playability over presentation. I'm sure gameplay will continually improve over next gen just the same, but I don't think it's tech that's holding them back in that regard anyway.
Oh, I know they'll still try to bring the shiny... The question's going to be once they're more accustomed to working with these platforms and find that they have some spare CPU cycles floating around, are they going to start using it for those behind the scenes things that can make a game truly great? Right now, we're still seeing developers work the way they always have, and not really optimizing for these multi-core processors the way they will even in the next year. So I'm not saying that the focus will immediately change, because as they say, we covet what we see... but once we reach that point where it's fairly easy to make your game look amazing, THEN WHAT?

And I also don't think you'll see it in every type of game. Something like Forza 5 is naturally suited to that sort of thinking, because despite the push for graphics, they also have a lot of calculations going on under the hood for things like tire wear, heat, car setup, etc. Now, you see them saying, "Hey, we can crunch these big data sets down remotely and then dump a profile back to the system that we can dedicate compute time to in order to have more realistic AI." And for a driving game, AI naturally tends to be more of a focus just because you don't want that rubber-band type AI that most racing titles have (where the cars always catch you no matter what, because RACING GAMES DO THAT). The question is going to be whether they start doing more of that with characters in first person shooters, where so often, the AI just SUCKS.

I'm not even saying it needs to be revolutionary, where you're thinking, "Oh my god, this is amazing AI!" It just needs to not be so broken anymore.

Some of this is also why I'm excited at the possibilities Kinect presents, because it adds another possible layer on top of how we game now that goes beyond just better graphics. And that doesn't need to be revolutionary either... It just needs to make sense for the given application. Using Kinect in immersive ways that are additive to using the controller is a good start.
post #7728 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeflonSoul View Post

My personal favorite digital store, GOG.com, has both Freespace games, the Descent series, and nearly all of the Wing Commanders I believe. No Homeworld...yet.
Meant to say thanks for this the other day.
post #7729 of 14802
I don't think the new CPUs change anything as far as multithreading goes. 360 CPU could run 6 concurrent threads (tri-core with SMT), PS3 could run 8, sort of (single core SMT + 6SPE). On next gen supposedly 2 cores are being reserved on either side, and the cores aren't SMT. So it's still a max of 6 threads, nothing they haven't seen for the last 8 years. Sure, they're more powerful, but still relatively weak compared to modern CPUs, unlike the current gen which was ahead of the desktop in a lot of ways.

A few things might get better treatment, but the main job of the CPU now is to be the GPU's little helper, and that can still be a significant burden. I'm not so sure there's even much left to go around after that, especially considering they aimed low on the CPU in the first place.

The only game I can think of that can crush even the newest CPU is Civ 5 and other strategy games But these chips can't come close to an i7 under any conditions, and AI (especially turn based) is the perfect scenario to offload to a cloud server.

So to answer your question, what to do when the game already looks amazing? I think you already know the answer....make it look even more amazing.
Edited by bd2003 - 9/10/13 at 7:08am
post #7730 of 14802
post #7731 of 14802
Honestly, I'm not even sure how much it would matter if the PS4 and Xbox-One were really that radically different in power (which I have no idea about). The multi-platform games will run on virtually the same code-base, most likely. There will certainly be minor cosmetic differences, but we saw that most games in the PS3/360 era ended up being identical across platforms. Yes, some exclusive titles looked better on their respective console, but there was never a 'this game could never been made on the other console' situation that I recall (unless that console was the Wii). In terms of raw power, I expect we'll see the same from most third parties and first party games will all look about the same (and likewise trail behind PC releases in certain ways).

AFAIC, the issue is does the Xbox One offer me a compelling experience? Right now, I simply don't know. I want it to, but Microsoft has muddled the message to me. My wife knows virtually nothing about the console, other than the negative press about used games...and now even if I decide I DO want the Xbox-One, I'll need to justify it at some point as to why it's worth the effort. "Because I want Halo 5' is one of the few things in it's checkbox at the moment....they can and should do better.

My biggest annoyance right now is some of Penello's statements smack of 'we didn't communicate poorly, you just listened wrong'. Blaming me for not understanding your message gets the equation backwards. If Microsoft had better communicated the inherent advantages in their system at E3, this might not even be a concern. Right now I'm trying to work out the confusing morass that is my Xbox Live Family Gold account...or was. Or is now Home Gold? Or something else. Depends on which MS rep I ask. :P
post #7732 of 14802
http://www.playstationgang.com/ps4xbox-one-deep-down-vs-ryse-son-of-rome-comparison/

I am living in a land of lunacy eek.gif

Comparing in game Ryse vs. CG trailer of Deep Down.

People are saying it is in game, but it appears to be CG to me.

Not saying DD won't look good in game, but this seems like people enjoy playing with a stacked deck.

I am currently trying to find 1080p footage of DD in game to look past the fanboy freak show on both sides. Arggh.


PS: The one screen I saw of what I am pretty sure was in game, looked like Dark Souls. Not a compliment!!! Granted that was 480p, and seemed to be looking at the game through a film or bucket of dirty water. Youtube mad.gif
post #7733 of 14802
Part of the problem is MS says some over the top statements and then does the opposite of what they say like
"Sony is not a competitor"
and more recently
"Specs do not matter"
but then spend time talking about specs??

if they wouldn't go so far to one end or another it wouldn't be that big of a deal, but you look like an internet fanboy with over-the-top statements like that, that obviously aren't true..
post #7734 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin-benjami View Post

Part of the problem is MS says some over the top statements and then does the opposite of what they say like
"Sony is not a competitor"
and more recently
"Specs do not matter"
but then spend time talking about specs??

if they wouldn't go so far to one end or another it wouldn't be that big of a deal, but you look like an internet fanboy with over-the-top statements like that, that obviously aren't true..

^^^^^^this^^^^^^

Initially, I thought Albert had more knowledge about tech stuff than it turned out he did. Having him the spokesman even if he is the middleman between tech guys and NeoGaf is a problem right there. They need to go on lockdown, focus on games, and the dashboard (which looks sick! by the way), and accept they don't have tech advantage presumably. And if they do have some advances we are not aware, put your best foot forward, and do not send out a nice guy (I like Albert, seems genuinely decent Man) to a place with wolves and demons and a few random nice tech peope like Gaf. Send out a well spoke tech guy that has some style and fight the good fight. or shut it. and if that fails, say you can porn skype while playing Halo 5! BOOM!
post #7735 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Savage View Post

http://www.playstationgang.com/ps4xbox-one-deep-down-vs-ryse-son-of-rome-comparison/

I am living in a land of lunacy eek.gif

Comparing in game Ryse vs. CG trailer of Deep Down.

People are saying it is in game, but it appears to be CG to me.

DD was never CG, but the first showing was recorded on a top end dev PC (Capcom did a tech presentation on it). We still need an HD feed from TGS/Sony event of the game running on the PS4 due to the terrible stream.

It is stupid though. One is a procedurally generated dungeon crawler, while the other seems to be a GOW arena beat em up. DD can use many more level design tricks to up graphic fidelity (at least until they show some large open spaces that is). It’s like comparing Ryse to Forza.
post #7736 of 14802
I think at this point comparing specs is pointless and we will just have to wait for any benchmarks that people may find ways to run on both systems.

I agree with whoever said the biggest lack in gaming is AI and I really hope the cloud function helps that with the X1 and hopefully the PS4 will have better AI as well.
s
I am a big Borderlands fan and I have to say, the AI is really stupid in that game where they compensate by making the NPCs harder to kill over time with slight variations such as different elemental effects and different approaches of attack, such as running up to you with a grenade...

But through out the entire game they continue to play the same way from the first moment of play.

I would like to see AI that is intelligent enough to strategize and try to flank and also interact with their world in a more realistic way. I would even argue that that is why online gaming, MMO in particular, are so big, because there is a real person behind each character who actually thinks about what is going on.

I think that is the next big hurdle for gaming.
post #7737 of 14802
The real issue is the perception that 50% more powerful GPU = 50% better looking. That's so far from true it's not even funny.

They'd better make their point by demonstrating how small the quality difference will be, rather than try and pretend like that the real world performance deficit doesn't exist.
post #7738 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

DD was never CG, but the first showing was recorded on a top end dev PC (Capcom did a tech presentation on it). We still need an HD feed from TGS/Sony event of the game running on the PS4 due to the terrible stream.

It is stupid though. One is a procedurally generated dungeon crawler, while the other seems to be a GOW arena beat em up. DD can use many more level design tricks to up graphic fidelity (at least until they show some large open spaces that is). It’s like comparing Ryse to Forza.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess my point that people like to play with a stacked deck is still the case. high end pc in game vs. xb1 in game. I knew something was off about this comparison....just figured it was a CG thing. Thanks again. Also, good points about closed vs open spaces, etc.
post #7739 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

DD was never CG, but the first showing was recorded on a top end dev PC (Capcom did a tech presentation on it). We still need an HD feed from TGS/Sony event of the game running on the PS4 due to the terrible stream.
You mean the CGI target render was created on a top end dev PC? rolleyes.gif Because, you know, Sony would never do anything like that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqSjfhXpnbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko9xC6TMdiw

Oh wait, they're guilty of doing it before the PS3 launched!

Here's a recent trailer for Deep Down. It's posted with comments disabled and I can't read Japanese. It looks a little more plausible in this video but it still looks like a GPU tech demo and not much actual gameplay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psw07YbY70U
post #7740 of 14802
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

The real issue is the perception that 50% more powerful GPU = 50% better looking. That's so far from true it's not even funny.

They'd better make their point by demonstrating how small the quality difference will be, rather than try and pretend like that the real world performance deficit doesn't exist.
What you're saying about the GPU is totally true. The other question is... how much offloading of other basic system tasks does each architecture do? Because that can greatly affect what you have left for the other game functions. For instance, the initial leaks for Xbox One's architecture basically said that one of the CPU cores was going to be partially dedicated to Kinect, which of course spurred the Kinect haters to say, "OMG, so the system could have been more powerful without Kinect?" After the Hot Chips conference, we now know that Microsoft is using DPUs from Tensilica to handle the audio processing, including most of Kinect's voice-related functions, which means those functions essentially have zero hit to the main CPU (and have more processing power than even Creative Labs' Z-series cards offer on the PC side). The question now becomes how many other functions like that are being offloaded? They have said that the architecture has some 50 MCUs and 15 dedicated processors for these other functions... and that's what I think could ultimately be very telling as far as how much performance each system can eke out. If Cerny's brute force approach with the PS4 architecture isn't as specialized in some of the other areas as Microsoft's more balanced distributed approach, you could very well see a zero sum game between the two except for a few system-exclusive titles that really find each architecture's stride.

But again, I don't think we'll REALLY see each system's initial strengths until next year when you have system tailored stuff like Halo 5 on the Xbox One and Infamous: Second Son on the PS4 to drool over. Regardless, if you're making your console-buying decision based on specs that people are throwing out there without full knowledge of the related system architecture, you're doing it wrong. cool.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Xbox Area
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › The Official Xbox One thread...