PlayStation 4 gives up to 5.5GB of RAM to game developers

[vcfan]

Battlefield 4, Assassins Creed, Call of Duty: Ghosts and many other games are coming to the Sony PS4 as 1080p/60fps. Its just developer preference.

 

battlefield 4 is 720p60, AC is 30fps, COD is the only one said to be 1080p60 but we'll see,because thats the only thing that would be 60fps on PS4. And this is in no way just because of "developer preference". That is the silliest thing ive heard. You dont reduce your framerate goals because you just feel like it,you reduce your framerate goals because the hardware cant handle more. All of those games i mentioned were struggling to even reach 30fps,while games already done for xbox one are happily running 1080p60 ,and are well polished. There were even complaints that some ps4 games that were struggling to reach 30fps even had horrible image quality,like drive club.

[BajiRav]

battlefield 4 is 720p60, AC is 30fps, COD is the only one said to be 1080p60 but we'll see,because thats the only thing that would be 60fps on PS4. And this is in no way just because of "developer preference". That is the silliest thing ive heard. You dont reduce your framerate goals because you just feel like it,you reduce your framerate goals because the hardware cant handle more. All of those games i mentioned were struggling to even reach 30fps,while games already done for xbox one are happily running 1080p60 ,and are well polished. There were even complaints that some ps4 games that were struggling to reach 30fps even had horrible image quality,like drive club.

Mark Cerny is going to personally fix all those games, he has been in the industry for a long time.

[vcfan]

Mark Cerny is going to personally fix all those games, he has been in the industry for a long time.

 

too bad for Mark Cerny that he isnt a hardware engineer. He's a game engine master and software developer? Great,still doesnt mean he knows anything about hardware. But I think PS4 developers are realizing that lets say trying to fill up that audio buffer is taking a mighty long time because of the latency of the GDDR5 is handicapping our whole frame render. Even out of order execution wont help you here. What a waste of resources. Why do you think PCs only use GDDR5 for vram only? DDR3 is still faster for smaller memory operations,like a CPU or I/O use.

[JonnyLH]

I've seen this said before but can you elaborate further? Xbox 360 uses GDDR3 IIRC so why is GDDR5 considered bad?

I'd like to clear and say GDDR is far from a negative for games, it is exceptionally good for graphical rendering of games due to its nature of being good at writing/reading large amounts of data fast. On the other hand, DDR is good at accessing the RAM multiple times in short periods. If you see what I mean?

 

Due to gaming mostly writing & reading large amounts of data, that's why GDDR is exceptionally suited to gaming and is bundled with GPU's. The reason its not used for the CPU is because CPU's are more sensitive to latency and CPU's often need to access the RAM multiple times exceptionally fast rather than pulling large amounts of data exceptionally fast. So for example, If I'm playing Call of Duty, the world/player models will be stored in RAM. That's GB's of data which need to wrote to RAM almost instantaneously, which GDDR does a far better job of. Although, like vcfan said above me, this will prove massive problems for the audio buffer due to the returning latency throwing out the whole frame render. If it does that, its why you see games stutter as the audio buffer needs to catch up with the frame tick as the latency cripples the engine. That's why DDR is used as a general RAM because it's latencies are extremely low and causes no bottlenecks like that.

 

With the 360, they had a hardware re scaling, hardware audio encoding so it didn't have to worry around the GDDR bottlenecks. They've done a similar thing with the X1 but the other way round, they can use the small ESRAM to provide some of the benefits of GDDR. For example, frame-buffering. 

 

Hope that helps.

[Rodrigo]

1)  A). Sony is free to use OpenGL, Direct API or DirectX, they even said they made improvements to DirectX for the PS4.

 

http://www.geek.com/games/sony-iimprove-directx-11-for-the-ps4-blu-ray-1544364/

 

So they can modify / fix it as they like and have full control over it. 

 

Any development Microsoft does on DirectX needs to be released to public under its Microsoft Public Licensing, while on the other hand whatever improvements Sony does to DirectX it doesn't need to show Microsoft.

Microsoft definitely don't have the edge here.

 

As for development tools, its been said numerous times that Sony will focus on these because they want developers to be able to create games faster and easier than ever before. I dont think Microsoft has the edge because they make Visual Studio

 

This is so ridiculous. It's so incredible I don't even know what to reply.

[SikSlayer]

I bring up NeoGaf because it is a huge gaming forum that is one of the largest and one of the most well known on the Internet and it used to be multiplatform.  It's clearly not multiplatform anymore and has become a joke of a forum.   This is relevant to the discussion because that is a lot of different people with the same "Hive Mind" as almost all of them think alike.

 

NeoGAF was always this biased. Always.

That "Hive Mind", sure is a trip too. It's always been a factor in debates such as these.

[Yogurtmaster]

All that stuff I typed is gone... ugg...

The Xbox One as far as I can tell has 8 Gigabytes of Unified memory that gets mainly carved up by the Hypervisor.

My understanding is the hypervisor controls the virtual machines, controls the communications between the virtual machines and how much memory each VM gets. So the Apps VM gets RAM dedicated to apps and system wide Kinect and the games VM gets RAM that is dedicated to it.

So, if Microsoft puts in a parameter to the Hypervisor, they can assign memory at will.

Each VM is put on a display plane that can be switched instantly between planes.

This is how I think it all happens. I am not an insider or have information, but this is the logical way that I would do it.

[Thief000]

You are absolutely correct Yogurtmaster, the hypervisor governs all in the Xbox One and assigns the memory address space. The harddrive will also contain a swap file (slow memory) according to rumors, so there will be plenty for the Xbox One to play around with.

[norseman]

With all this RAM dedicated to the OS, I hope the guide menu in the Xbox will be fluid. Using the guide while playing a demanding game turned it into a horrible jerky mess which took forever to load.

You know it will be, if you think Windows 8/8.1 and WP8 are.

[trooper11]

 

 

I think you missed the point, I like both consoles but for different reasons. I play mostly multi-platform games which means a graphics advantage is important because everything else in the game will be the same between the two consoles.

 

The RAM matters because games utilize the ram and having more ram available means it can have more stored textures, higher anti-aliasing (AA), post-processing, and even more normal mapping..

If your going to argue against stronger hardware or available memory of hardware you might as well go back to playing Quake 1, Wolfenstein or Doom 1 because without the hardware improvements we've had since then all the games would look like those except maybe be longer / have more missions.

 

 

 

Again its not as simple as gddr5 vs ddr3. You can't deny the fact that they use different systems. My point is that there is no clear advantage at this point, the architectures aren't the same. I've seen plenty of legitimate breakdowns that point to the fact that there is no clear answer yet.

 

The gpu difference is clear and easy to point to.

 

I was not arguing against stronger hardware. The fact that you accuse me of that just because I lay out a different point is silly.

 

My take away here is that because I made a point that might put the ps4 in a bad (by the way, it doesn't. None of this bad for either console), I'm dismissed as making 'crazy' arguments.

[Yogurtmaster]

Hey the PS4 and Xbox One might even free up some RAM for developers as future OS updates reduce the load the OS's put on the system.  Its always a possibility.  As for the cloud processing I'm still not convinced its the right way to go where games are concerned.

 

You mean to tell me that these consoles have all this nice hardware, yet they're willing to let it go to waste by using the cloud?  You thought Crysis 3 looked good on consoles now? You should see it with the PS4/X1 hardware.  Also with the cloud we have the issues of always needing an internet connection? What was that Microsoft said about not needing an internet connection?

Here is the way I see things. The next generation is all about the Internet. The longer we go towards the next generation of consoles the more the single player experience is going to start to go away. I don't mean go away from the single player aspect, but towards being offline.

The Internet isn't just about multiplayer gaming, the Internet is an enhancement or an augment of the abilities of the game play.

The Xbox One is a lot more powerful (10 times max) than the Xbox 360 out of the box. However, with server power that will augment the box entirely. So again, the Internet will improve graphics and gameplay directly and indirectly so that next generation of console gaming can last longer than just 6-8 years, but 10-15 years.

The Xbox one console isn't your typical console from 10 years ago. It's a true console for the 21st century. I am not trying to get into marketing terms here, but Microsoft learned from the Xbox 360. You can clearly see the direction that Microsoft is heading. They evolved the Xbox 360 from simple blades to what they have today and it only had 512 megs of ram and it couldn't exist with an OS at the same time because of the lack of memory.

The Xbox One console isn't going to be the same console 5 years from now with the one that launches this Christmas season. It's going to drastically evolve into something completely different. The focus will still be gaming, but the games will have evolved and the apps and functionality will have evolved with it.

Microsoft bet on some technologies like Smart-Glass, WiFi-Direct, Kinect, and "The Cloud". Imagine what they can do with these technologies when an OS is running all the time and imagine how WiFi-Direct, Kinect, and "The Cloud" can affect future hardware that works directly with the Xbox One.

Also about future hardware. I found this tidbit on Twitter which was after the May 21st, 2013 Microsoft Xbox One Event. So, when you see Kudo Tsunoda on stage, you will see the new hardware Microsoft is working on for the Xbox One. It might be some HMD like in that document or something else.

[HawkMan]

 

1)  A). Sony is free to use OpenGL, Direct API or DirectX, they even said they made improvements to DirectX for the PS4.

 

NO, no no no no, NO!

 

that's not what they said. the PS4 does not in any way use DX, it uses OpenGL. they're simply using DX terms in marketing and PR because that's what people understand. but they're not in any way or form using DX. 

 

if you're going to post "facts" make sure they actually are first, your track record is getting pretty bad. 

[-T- Member]

Sony using DirectX is literally the craziest thing i've read yet. Does DirectX run on FreeBSD ?

[BajiRav]

Sony using DirectX is literally the craziest thing i've read yet. Does DirectX run on FreeBSD ?

They are not. Their API supposedly supports DX 11 "feature set" .

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

What? Basically everything on the ps4 is on pc (Free to Play) or is also on the Xbox. Sony really fubared their launch by not having a lot of true exclusives. If FF and KH 3 were actually exclusive to Sony then I would have pe-ordered the ps4 as well. 

 

What? :huh: "Fubared their launch"? The console hasn't launched, how can they **** it up? I don't even know why I'm wasting my time to such a ridiculous comment but hey ho.

 

And if you want to hang on to the idea that Sony will manage to shrink the OS over time and free up more to developers then the same applies to MS and the XB1 of course.

 

Actually if history is anything to go by, Microsoft will increase the OS size. The 360 launched with a 16 MB flash OS which was accompanied by a 140+ MB update stored on the HDD/internal memory when NXE launched. Of course Microsoft was smart and then split the OS up to allow for choice to lower the footprint when it comes to apps. Sony for some reason force apps down users throat whether you like them or not. Would give anything to remove that fricking Singstar icon from my XMB.

 

That's not to say that increasing the OS is always a bad thing, we can do a lot more on the 360 than was originally possible. Microsoft were fortunate enough to include more RAM in the 360 that they never had to worry about the OS stealing from the game's requirements. However, if Sony found advantages doing it with the PS3's OS then why wouldn't they leave that door open for the PS4 too? It's not hanging onto an idea, it's just future planning that makes sense based on their past experience. Not sure why you're trying to spin that negatively? :wacko:

 

  No, I am not really blaming the wrong company at all.   See, here is something HUGE you missed.

 

1) You can do all of those media functions and still play games.  The focus is GAMES (for an example of this see E3, where Microsoft SHOWED GAMES and SONY SHOWED VERY LITTLE).  People buy a gaming console for um games and Microsoft showed them very well.

 

2) Microsoft told people what they were going to do ahead of time, people just didn't listen.  Microsoft said that they were focusing games at E3, which is what they did.  In fact they showed 3-4 games at their may 21st conference and said that E3 would be all about games.  Again, people skipped right over that and didn't listen.  Most of them probably didn't listen because they already had bought Sony's line about Sony being for the hard core gamer and people wanted to hear what they wanted to hear.  It's not rocket science here and it's pretty simple to figure out.

 

3) History shows us that E3 was in fact all about the games.  In fact the Xbox One had better graphical titles than Sony and more titles than Sony and has a higher quality launch as it stands currently.  We haven't had GameCom yet or the Tokyo game show yet so this is how it stands currently.  Most people will agree that Microsoft had a far better showing at E3 when it comes to the GAMES.  No doubt about it.  No fanboy propaganda, no trying to manipulate anything, the facts are the facts.  The truth is the truth.

 

Microsoft's problem at E3, wasn't the games.  It was that Sony's console wasn't going to have DRM and the price was lower for the PS4.  For the final time, you are wrong.

 

Are you just choosing to completely blank Destination PlayStation in February then? Both companies have shown plenty of games now. People mock Microsoft for talking about sports and TV before games. You know, the primary function that people will buy the X1 for?....So much for focusing on games when it came across like an after thought.

 

I'm not sure what the official count is on exclusives these days, but Sony haven't had to put nearly as much effort into securing them because they have an open platform, which F2P/indie devs have taken advantage of. How long they'll have that advantage for remains to be seen. We've already had comment from Warframe's developer they're interested in bringing the game to X1 now self publishing is possible.

[HawkMan]

increasing the OS size over time, is probably why MS reserves at least 6 times as much memory as the OS needs for the the OS. 

 

that and the multitasking functions and supporting potentially very large and complex apps within the OS' app system. Not to forget that just because the Xbox says the OS should always have access to 3GB, doesn't make them exlcusively reserved to the OS. games should be able to use it for non volatile stuff, and if the OS should need the ram it can just overwrite it which is just as fast as simply writing in the empty block. 

[dead.cell]

Well, the console reveal which was supposed to be a little bit at the May 21st event and then the games at E3 and then bits and pieces including more games at gamescom and the Tokyo game show tell the entire story.  A console reveal doesn't have to show the games when it's simply 2 weeks away from E3.  In fact I would say its irrelevant.

 

So, your point is entirely moot.  Again, it's people making stuff up and overreacting.

 

I was responding to your comment saying, "Sony is basically trying to get people to believe that they only focus on gaming and that is all."

 

My point was that Sony didn't have to do any marketing for people to be under the assumption that the Xbox One isn't focused around gaming. Microsoft is the one who essentially told the world what their console was about, and they are the sole reason that videos like this exist:

 

 

Honestly, I don't understand why we're demonizing either company to be honest. Surprise surprise, both companies want you to buy their console, for you to believe that theirs is THE best option for every gamer, and so on. They both have marketing strategies which often involve straight bullet points and take-aways for their products. I've had to sit in both Sony and Microsoft meets before, and they're really no different. :ermm:

 

As for the people, yes, they always overreact. Thankfully, Microsoft still listens and acts accordingly. (for the most part)

[Yogurtmaster]

What? :huh: "Fubared their launch"? The console hasn't launched, how can they **** it up? I don't even know why I'm wasting my time to such a ridiculous comment but hey ho.

 

 

Actually if history is anything to go by, Microsoft will increase the OS size. The 360 launched with a 16 MB flash OS which was accompanied by a 140+ MB update stored on the HDD/internal memory when NXE launched. Of course Microsoft was smart and then split the OS up to allow for choice to lower the footprint when it comes to apps. Sony for some reason force apps down users throat whether you like them or not. Would give anything to remove that fricking Singstar icon from my XMB.

 

That's not to say that increasing the OS is always a bad thing, we can do a lot more on the 360 than was originally possible. Microsoft were fortunate enough to include more RAM in the 360 that they never had to worry about the OS stealing from the game's requirements. However, if Sony found advantages doing it with the PS3's OS then why wouldn't they leave that door open for the PS4 too? It's not hanging onto an idea, it's just future planning that makes sense based on their past experience. Not sure why you're trying to spin that negatively? :wacko:

 

 

Are you just choosing to completely blank Destination PlayStation in February then? Both companies have shown plenty of games now. People mock Microsoft for talking about sports and TV before games. You know, the primary function that people will buy the X1 for?....So much for focusing on games when it came across like an after thought.

 

I'm not sure what the official count is on exclusives these days, but Sony haven't had to put nearly as much effort into securing them because they have an open platform, which F2P/indie devs have taken advantage of. How long they'll have that advantage for remains to be seen. We've already had comment from Warframe's developer they're interested in bringing the game to X1 now self publishing is possible.

The few games that were shown at the Feb 20th, PlayStation event were also shown at E3 and other than "The Order 1880" game there wasn't really anything there that was exclusive. All that other stuff like Warframe is free to play garbage already on Steam for any computer to play for free, so it's just fluff to fill space because Sony didn't have really all that many games.

Microsoft told everyone before the May 21st event that E3 was about the games and so they showed them. How hard is it to understand?

Here, I will make it even simpler for you.

Microsoft choose the launch event to show some of the basic TV features and entertainment features so it wouldn't be shown and polluted at E3.

It's not a big deal and most people lack the ability to grasp simple ideas and concepts. A launch 2 weeks from E3 isn't very hard to understand that the games are E3. This doesn't mean that the games are not the star, this means they show a little bit of what the Xbox has for entertainment features and show the big guns of gaming at E3. Wow! That was sooooooo, complicated and hard.

If WarFrame shows up on the XB1, great. If it doesn't not a big deal. I played it for 10 minutes on Steam, it's boring. I wouldn't pay for it anyway and I don't even play it because it is free. It looks cool, but when I played it I was bored to tears. It's nothing special. I am not trying to give out damage control here, WarFrame is the most boring game that I have played in all of 2013. I got past the tutorial and lost interest in it really quick. I had to force myself just to play it because I just couldn't really get excited over it. So, if games like this are coming the PS4 and Xbox One I am not interested. Let's just say the pictures make it look interesting, but the game play for me at least in the beginning levels is just really boring.

[Yogurtmaster]

I was responding to your comment saying, "Sony is basically trying to get people to believe that they only focus on gaming and that is all."

 

My point was that Sony didn't have to do any marketing for people to be under the assumption that the Xbox One isn't focused around gaming. Microsoft is the one who essentially told the world what their console was about, and they are the sole reason that videos like this exist:

 

 

Honestly, I don't understand why we're demonizing either company to be honest. Surprise surprise, both companies want you to buy their console, for you to believe that theirs is THE best option for every gamer, and so on. They both have marketing strategies which often involve straight bullet points and take-aways for their products. I've had to sit in both Sony and Microsoft meets before, and they're really no different. :ermm:

 

As for the people, yes, they always overreact. Thankfully, Microsoft still listens and acts accordingly. (for the most part)

As I said to the other guy. It's not about marketing. It's about having a brain and understanding on how things work.

1) Before the announcement on May 21st, they said that E3 would be about the games, they made this VERY CLEAR. Then they announced a console on May 21st, they showed it, they showed some TV and entertainment features and a few games.

2) They announced all of the games two weeks later on June 10th, 2013 at E3, just like they said they were going to do. They didn't want to pollute E3 with TV and other entertainment announcements and wanted E3 to be all about the games, which it was.

3) What in the heck is the problem here? Where is the lack of understanding? Microsoft built this as a GAMES MACHINE, that is why people buy it. E3 made that obvious and GamesCom and the Tokyo game show are going to drive that home.

People are just making things up because of their own lack of understanding. It's a perception problem because the mass of people are completely clueless. How many times do you have to drive home that E3 is about the games. How many times do I have to keep typing that out?

[dead.cell]

1) Before the announcement on May 21st, they said that E3 would be about the games, they made this VERY CLEAR. Then they announced a console on May 21st, they showed it, they showed some TV and entertainment features and a few games.

Here, I will make it even simpler for you.

Microsoft choose the launch event to show some of the basic TV features and entertainment features so it wouldn't be shown and polluted at E3.

It's not a big deal and most people lack the ability to grasp simple ideas and concepts. A launch 2 weeks from E3 isn't very hard to understand that the games are E3. This doesn't mean that the games are not the star, this means they show a little bit of what the Xbox has for entertainment features and show the big guns of gaming at E3. Wow! That was sooooooo, complicated and hard.

 

At least we've finally established, from your own words, that the reason people believe the Xbox One isn't a gaming focused machine is because of what Microsoft chose to announce. Doesn't matter if they announced games later, first impressions are everything.

 

Sony didn't have to lift a finger for people to believe the Xbox One isn't about games.

 

That's all I'm saying here. Now, Sony did capitalize on the whole DRM bit, but that's a completely different story altogether. I'm just saying Sony's not responsible at all for people thinking the Xbox One isn't focused on gaming, as you claimed in your post originally.

[Yogurtmaster]

At least we've finally established, from your own words, that the reason people believe the Xbox One isn't a gaming focused machine is because of what Microsoft chose to announce. Doesn't matter if they announced games later, first impressions are everything.

 

Sony didn't have to lift a finger for people to believe the Xbox One isn't about games.

 

That's all I'm saying here. Now, Sony did capitalize on the whole DRM bit, but that's a completely different story altogether. I'm just saying Sony's not responsible at all for people thinking the Xbox One isn't focused on gaming, as you claimed in your post originally.

They showed games in the May 21st event, they showed a lot more games at E3.

If they showed the non gaming features at E3, that would have been a lot worse.

What you said is very shallow minded and very misleading and in my mind doesn't make any sense.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

The few games that were shown at the Feb 20th, PlayStation event were also shown at E3 and other than "The Order 1880" game there wasn't really anything there that was exclusive. All that other stuff like Warframe is free to play garbage already on Steam for any computer to play for free, so it's just fluff to fill space because Sony didn't have really all that many games.

Microsoft told everyone before the May 21st event that E3 was about the games and so they showed them. How hard is it to understand?

Here, I will make it even simpler for you.

Microsoft choose the launch event to show some of the basic TV features and entertainment features so it wouldn't be shown and polluted at E3.

It's not a big deal and most people lack the ability to grasp simple ideas and concepts. A launch 2 weeks from E3 isn't very hard to understand that the games are E3. This doesn't mean that the games are not the star, this means they show a little bit of what the Xbox has for entertainment features and show the big guns of gaming at E3. Wow! That was sooooooo, complicated and hard.

If WarFrame shows up on the XB1, great. If it doesn't not a big deal. I played it for 10 minutes on Steam, it's boring. I wouldn't pay for it anyway and I don't even play it because it is free. It looks cool, but when I played it I was bored to tears. It's nothing special. I am not trying to give out damage control here, WarFrame is the most boring game that I have played in all of 2013. I got past the tutorial and lost interest in it really quick. I had to force myself just to play it because I just couldn't really get excited over it. So, if games like this are coming the PS4 and Xbox One I am not interested. Let's just say the pictures make it look interesting, but the game play for me at least in the beginning levels is just really boring.

 

Lose the patronising attitude please. I'm fully aware what Microsoft said they would show and when. I said people are/did mock them because the number 1 bullet point on any game console's feature list should be games. Microsoft did it backwards and paid the price having to deal with unhappy viewers. Anyone who was actually serious about X1 having no games on that day is quite frankly an idiot, but that doesn't mean they can't be disappointed for the lack of them.

 

The rest of the backlash from Xbox Reveal was aimed at the US centric features and I completely agree with them. The same goes for Nintendo and Sony as far as I'm concerned so I'm not cherry picking my complaints. It's almost August and Nintendo still haven't released Wii U TVii outside of NA.

 

Microsoft had the Reveal planned earlier than May but all signs tell us it was delayed. At that stage they should have just scrapped the idea because Sony already had the jump that it wouldn't have made a difference. Microsoft should have just combined their announcements at E3. 2hrs is what Sony schedule, there's no reason Microsoft can't do the same, especially this year when Nintendo didn't have a typical press event. Did we really need to see EA/Ubisoft repeat everything we'd already seen from Microsoft/Sony's previous events? Not only would combining the announcements keep everyone happy who was only interested in seeing the games; they wouldn't have to deal with those 3 weeks of the worst PR in recent gaming history. Everything could have been explained in full in front of the world's media. But no, that's too straight forward and instead they confused everyone, back tracked, fired the man at the top and completely embarrassed themselves in the process. Yeah, you're right. Much better. :rolleyes:

 

Also, as for your comments on games, it doesn't really matter what you think as an individual. We all know taste is subjective, but your flippent attitude stinks quite frankly if you lump all F2P games in the "garage" pile based on 1 game, especially when you've admitted to only playing for 10 minutes (great reviewing skills there). Even if you dislike the games on offer at least Sony have put some decent cash behind them with titles like Planetside 2 compared to XBLA F2P titles like FHP WS.

[Yogurtmaster]

Lose the patronising attitude please. I'm fully aware what Microsoft said they would show and when. I said people are/did mock them because the number 1 bullet point on any game console's feature list should be games. Microsoft did it backwards and paid the price having to deal with unhappy viewers. Anyone who was actually serious about X1 having no games on that day is quite frankly an idiot, but that doesn't mean they can't be disappointed for the lack of them.

Microsoft showed Quantum Break and Forza as exclusives and then went on to show EA Sports and COD. So, those aren't games now?

Remember, they said that they would focus on games 2 WEEKS LATER. This was fully announced. E3 IS A GAMES SHOW. YOU KNOW WHERE THEY SHOW THE GAMES? TWO WEEKS LATER. Come on, man. Get with it.

Unhappy viewers about games are dumb, they are. There are no way around that. I can understand people who are not patient but those that said that the Xbox One doesn't have games are idiotic.

The rest of the backlash from Xbox Reveal was aimed at the US centric features and I completely agree with them. The same goes for Nintendo and Sony as far as I'm concerned so I'm not cherry picking my complaints. It's almost August and Nintendo still haven't released Wii U TVii outside of NA.

The US centric stuff is true to a point. However, almost every video device in the world uses HDMI. So a satellite box has an HDMI device in the USA as it does in England. All Microsoft has to do is make a deal with your provider to get you the guide and frequencies for the IR Blast and you are good to go. Not real rocket science here.

Microsoft had the Reveal planned earlier than May but all signs tell us it was delayed. At that stage they should have just scrapped the idea because Sony already had the jump that it wouldn't have made a difference. Microsoft should have just combined their announcements at E3. 2hrs is what Sony schedule, there's no reason Microsoft can't do the same, especially this year when Nintendo didn't have a typical press event. Did we really need to see EA/Ubisoft repeat everything we'd already seen from Microsoft/Sony's previous events? Not only would combining the announcements keep everyone happy who were only interested in seeing the games; they wouldn't have to deal with those 3 weeks of the worst PR in recent gaming history. Everything could have been explained in full in front of the world's media. But no, that's too straight forward and instead they confused everyone, back tracked and fired the man at the top. Yeah, you're right. Much better.

Two hours is way too long for most people to sit though, that is stupid. Sony was stupid to do that on Feb 20th. No, you don't display non gaming stuff at a Gaming Show, that is stupid. What are you thinking dude? Seriously???????????

No, have a separate show for that stuff, nobody wants to watch it at E3. People want E3 for gaming and that is all. You don't have the correct venue, you don't have the correct audience that is your target there.

I am not trying to insult you here, but you might want to do some research on business and how it works.

Also, as for your comments on games, it doesn't really matter what you think as an individual. We all know taste is subjective, but your flippent attitude stinks quite frankly if you lump all F2P games in the "garage" pile based on 1 game, especially when you've admitted to only playing for 10 minutes (great reviewing skills there). Even if you dislike the games on offer at least Sony have put some decent cash behind them with titles like Planetside 2 compared to XBLA F2P titles like FHP WS.

I didn't say that all Free to play games are horrible. I said that one game I played was horrible. With about 90 percent of Sony's PS4 show at E3, I can already play on the LOWEST END PC FOR FREE RIGHT NOW, why do I need to buy a PS4 for that? Sony failed at E3. They only won because of the non-drm which is moot now anyway and price, that is all. They never won on gaming.

If you are at E3, you should win on gaming, everything else is just dumb. Because you buy a gaming console to play games on and E3 is a game show about games. Get it? It's really not that hard dude, it's not that hard at all.

I played Warframe on a low end PC that costs around $100 today for free. Why would I buy a PS4 or an Xbox One for those games? They shouldn't be some secret asset at E3 to show people they should just be available and you play them. Sony took half of the E3 show to put on stage games that anyone can get for free and play on any PC right now, that is just dumb and reeks of desperation. I am not sure how you can spin that?

[dead.cell]

I think he just wants to argue. He doesn't even seem to remember the things he's literally just said.

 

Meanwhile, Microsoft has touted the Xbox One as being the ONE device you need for everything. It's in the damn name. It's what they announced to the world, and it's what I've continued to hear from them as a company, both from what they've said publicly and the Microsoft meetings I've attended. In fact, to quote one of the Microsoft reps I've talked to, "It does everything gaming and more!"

 

So for people to be under the impression that the Xbox One isn't a gaming focused machine, I ask: What did Sony have to do with that? Oh right... Nothing. Nothing at all. The misunderstandings people have about the Xbox One are because of Microsoft, and Microsoft alone. Now, Microsoft has accepted responsibility, and are actively working to ensure gamers are aware of all their great features, but again, that has nothing to do with anything with Sony at all.

 

There are plenty of reasons why someone may choose to dislike Sony; I just don't understand the part where people need to start making up reasons though. :huh:

[Marshall Veteran]

This thread has degenerated into nothing but petty arguments.

 

Thread Closed