30 replies to this topic

[compl3x]

Jose_49, on 22 April 2012 - 21:44, said:

I don't care if it has better graphics or not. It's as the previous neowin editorial. You get a visually appealing game, and since it has very clumsy controls, it isn't enjoyable at all.

Bingo. Inputs on touch screens aren't conducive to good gameplay. It's fine for simple games, anything else is, as you said, clumsy.

If you need an example just look at the Max Payne port for iOS. Virtual, on screen controls are terrible.

[satukoro]

This graph makes the assumption that new consoles won't be released with improved graphics processing prior to 2014. Point made though, mobile devices are becoming qutie powerful as far as graphics go.

[Emn1ty]

satukoro, on 23 April 2012 - 01:49, said:

This graph makes the assumption that new consoles won't be released with improved graphics processing prior to 2014. Point made though, mobile devices are becoming qutie powerful as far as graphics go.

Actually, they have an averaged charting of where PC's and Consoles would be with the dotted lines. And if you look, the consoles are still ahead with that curve assuming another console with a similar technology leap is released.

[Audioboxer]

Only so much you can do with better graphics if the input system can't improve.

Maybe I'm one in a thousand, but I'm more interested in PS Vita like platforms reaching console graphics, yet maintaining decent battery life. As the Vita seems to produce some decent graphics, what I'd like to see next is battery tech getting better, not so much mobile phones catching up to dedicated handhelds/'consoles' in the graphics department.

Smartphone batteries are bad enough at times as it is, I don't want to be playing cutting edge graphical experiences on my phone on the train in the morning for the battery to die by lunch.

Simple mobile games do it for me (especially puzzle), for anything else, I'd as I mentioned at the start of this post always prefer dedicated.

[LogicalApex]

Nothing magical here at all. The console will improve in its next iteration and PCs have been improving constantly so the mobile platform will lag behind the current technology level of its day. It will improve iteratively though and have increasingly better performance over time.

The growth in console graphics performance isn't all that amazing really. The only thing this graph really proves is that there was no real demand for mobile gaming quality graphics until recently. It will be interesting to see what the sustained growth in graphics power for mobile platforms are over a longer period, such as the scale used to compare it here to consoles and PCs.

[rajputwarrior]

you guys are missing the point... they are going to have hardware faster then a ps3 in a tiny tiny little box. that's pretty crazy....

[Emn1ty]

rajputwarrior, on 23 April 2012 - 22:53, said:

you guys are missing the point... they are going to have hardware faster then a ps3 in a tiny tiny little box. that's pretty crazy....

The issue I have is: why? I don't get what a mobile platform could possibly use that power for besides improving the visuals of the games which really isn't their primary function anyways. I know people pretty much pay for the latest and greatest anyways but they could simply optimize the current platform rather than upgrade the hardware (such as improving battery life). I'd rather have a phone that needs a charge once a week than one that can run Mass Effect 3 but dies at the end of the day.

[rajputwarrior]

Emn1ty, on 23 April 2012 - 23:03, said:

The issue I have is: why? I don't get what a mobile platform could possibly use that power for besides improving the visuals of the games which really isn't their primary function anyways. I know people pretty much pay for the latest and greatest anyways but they could simply optimize the current platform rather than upgrade the hardware (such as improving battery life). I'd rather have a phone that needs a charge once a week than one that can run Mass Effect 3 but dies at the end of the day.

oh i agree with you and everyone else about the battery issue. but to me, mobile cpus/gpus/apus/*whatever*us have come a long way pretty quickly.

[Anthony Tosie]

Emn1ty, on 23 April 2012 - 23:03, said:

The issue I have is: why? I don't get what a mobile platform could possibly use that power for besides improving the visuals of the games which really isn't their primary function anyways. I know people pretty much pay for the latest and greatest anyways but they could simply optimize the current platform rather than upgrade the hardware (such as improving battery life). I'd rather have a phone that needs a charge once a week than one that can run Mass Effect 3 but dies at the end of the day.

Mobile gaming isn't the primary function of tablets, but PC gaming isn't the primary function of PCs either. Battery life has been steadily improving along with graphical power, so it's not like they're ignoring that issue.

[Emn1ty]

rajputwarrior, on 23 April 2012 - 23:06, said:

oh i agree with you and everyone else about the battery issue. but to me, mobile cpus/gpus/apus/*whatever*us have come a long way pretty quickly.

I agree. I just hate that they've jumped into the gaming hardware bandwagon rather than pushing a more obvious form of optimization. My old phones would last days before needing a charge. New phones last around 10-16 hours. That's a huge step backward in terms of their actual purpose. There is so much technology available these days, phones with similar power to what they had 4 years ago could be streamlined to generate less heat and use less power.

Anthony Tosie, on 23 April 2012 - 23:08, said:

Mobile gaming isn't the primary function of tablets, but PC gaming isn't the primary function of PCs either. Battery life has been steadily improving along with graphical power, so it's not like they're ignoring that issue.

PC's can be built with that as a primary function. Phones and other mobile platforms cannot (at least not yet). A computer does what you make it to do. A phone/tablet is what it is and the fact that the manufacturers are blurring their purpose means that they are going to become riddled with features and stuff they don't need, driving up their price and preventing the consumer from seeing productive improvements and price drops as quickly as we should.

I'm not saying that they haven't improved anything, they certainly have. But today's smart phones could be a lot simpler and have a much, much longer battery life than they currently do if the focus was to minimize power consumption in the hardware/software rather than to beef up the power.

[Blackhearted]

rajputwarrior, on 23 April 2012 - 22:53, said:

you guys are missing the point... they are going to have hardware faster then a ps3 in a tiny tiny little box. that's pretty crazy....

If they were topping the ps3's power in a size as small as a phone say.... 2 or 3 years after the ps3s launch, you may have a point. But topping 9 year old hardware in a small form factor... not that amazing.

[rajputwarrior]

Emn1ty, on 23 April 2012 - 23:12, said:

I agree. I just hate that they've jumped into the gaming hardware bandwagon rather than pushing a more obvious form of optimization. My old phones would last days before needing a charge. New phones last around 10-16 hours. That's a huge step backward in terms of their actual purpose. There is so much technology available these days, phones with similar power to what they had 4 years ago could be streamlined to generate less heat and use less power.

and that's the problem i am seeing with a lot of phones manufacturers out there, especially the android manufactures. they push things like 4G/LTE modems out the door but completely ignore how bad batter life is when those modems in the phone. then they keep coming out with phones with power hungry dual cores and brag "WE ARE FASTER THEN THE IPHONE!!! HANDS DOWN!!!" but the battery will last half a day if you are lucky. I am willing to drop a few megahurtz if that means i will get a phone with a better battery life no problem...

[rajputwarrior]

Blackhearted, on 23 April 2012 - 23:16, said:

If they were topping the ps3's power in a size as small as a phone say.... 2 or 3 years after the ps3s launch, you may have a point. But topping 9 year old hardware in a small form factor... not that amazing.

but you gotta think when smart phones came into the game and starting pushing it's hardware. that maybe start about 4-5 years ago where the push began.

[Slammers]

Hmm I honestly think they my mean next gen consoles.Think about how fast mobile technology is progressing. We already have quad core cpu's with dual core gpu's etc.

I mean, obviously, the actual specs of phones and tablets have already suprpassed the ps3 and 360. The gfx in games are not better yet due to mobile game dev time and funding etc. but in actual hardware power tablets are already ahead.

So if in the next year 720/ps4 come out boasting hardware that is somewhere around a mid->migh end computer at this current time, it doesn't seem that crazy that in two - three years mobile gfx will have surpased them. Certainly in 4-5 years I think phones and tablets will be destroying the ps4/720.

[Anthony Tosie]

Emn1ty, on 23 April 2012 - 23:12, said:

PC's can be built with that as a primary function. Phones and other mobile platforms cannot (at least not yet). A computer does what you make it to do. A phone/tablet is what it is and the fact that the manufacturers are blurring their purpose means that they are going to become riddled with features and stuff they don't need, driving up their price and preventing the consumer from seeing productive improvements and price drops as quickly as we should.

I'm not saying that they haven't improved anything, they certainly have. But today's smart phones could be a lot simpler and have a much, much longer battery life than they currently do if the focus was to minimize power consumption in the hardware/software rather than to beef up the power.

Gaming apps are the overwhelmingly most-purchased apps on tablets and phones (and when I say "overwhelmingly", I mean it's literally not even remotely close). It's safe to say that people do want to game on these devices. And, as you point out, you can't upgrade phones. So why not give them the capabilities from the get-go? You can always purchase a different phone. Nvidia's Tegra platform isn't even in that many phones, and that's the company saying mobile graphics will match consoles in 2014.

If you feel your battery life is significantly shorter than it should be, there's always feature phones. But even still, graphics aren't impacting battery life as much as you probably think. That's primarily from operating on 3G/4G or over WiFi that zaps a phone's battery life. Unless you're gaming, you're probably not going to see any substantial impact from your phone's graphics.