Sony yet to show a functioning PS4 or a hands-on Remote Play demo


Recommended Posts

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

He is Executive Editor of IGN

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

(Title is his original tweet, edited for length)

Not sure about the authenticity of this but relevant here,

playstation4_gamescom_windows71-pcgh.jpg

  • Like 2

So he is claiming that at the booths they were PCs and not PS4s?

It's a known fact now that Sony didn't have any working PS4s at GamesCon, all were fake boxes and controller cables passed through them into something hidden below. It might be a devkit or a PC or whatever - nobody knows for sure.

Well I don't think this is a long term concern for consumers other than it might point to a bigger shortage at launch.  Unless we here about production issues such as part defects or something.

 

Its possible they had to divert all manufacturing towards launch units and decided to wait as long as possible to send any of those to shows, etc. 

 

If pcs can accurately demo these consoles, I guess there is less pressure to get a completed console put in its place.

Well I know its done all the time at E3 or before but it seems unheard of to still be using pcs this close to launch but maybe im wrong.

The picture shown was an EA game shown at the EA booth. Not really Sony's fault if the developer chooses to demo their game using PC's. I'm pretty sure BF4 was shown on actual PS4 hardware.

The picture shown was an EA game shown at the EA booth. Not really Sony's fault if the developer chooses to demo their game using PC's. I'm pretty sure BF4 was shown on actual PS4 hardware.

Yeah I have seen that pic before but the IGN guy is talking about Gamescon from just the other day.  Not really big deal but interesting for some reason.

I find it quite amusing to see all the negative press Xbox One got for having a few demos running on PC's and in the end Microsoft was actually the one to have working hardware.

 

PS4 gets a free pass. Way to go mainstream media. You suck.

  • Like 3

It's well known that both console manufacturers often use PC's and Dev kits to showcase things before the official release but i'm pretty sure this OP isn;t about that and more about the apparent lack of a real world actual PS4 demo.

I'm not particularly worried though, i'm Sony have crash tested the actual machine to the hind teeth as have MS.

I find it quite amusing to see all the negative press Xbox One got for having a few demos running on PC's and in the end Microsoft was actually the one to have working hardware.

 

I don't recall much negative press about it. Demoing on PC at e3 has been the norm for many years now. The e3 demo of Halo 2 was running on PC too.

 

But i do recall some fans saying One games were looking better than PS4 games and people telling them pretty much all the games were running on PC at e3 so it did not really matter.

 

We'll see when the real games hit the stores.

LaP, on 28 Aug 2013 - 18:23, said:

I don't recall much negative press about it. Demoing on PC at e3 has been the norm for many years now. The e3 demo of Halo 2 was running on PC too.

 

There was quite a lot in the tech blogs and gaming websites. The guys at Reddit and NeoGaf went batshit. Even here at Neowin, I tried telling people it was normal to use a PC and got a load of hostile replies...

I don't recall much negative press about it. Demoing on PC at e3 has been the norm for many years now. The e3 demo of Halo 2 was running on PC too.

 

But i do recall some fans saying One games were looking better than PS4 games and people telling them pretty much all the games were running on PC at e3 so it did not really matter.

 

We'll see when the real games hit the stores.

There was a lot (even a Neowin FPN) and it was largely inaccurate (only 1 game Lococyle used PCs and the dev readily admitted to it). It is still referred as an evidence of XB1's weakness every now and then,

see this (and note the timestamps),

X1 demos were running on high powered PCs.

Here's the accusation,

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-One-Games-E3-Were-Running-Windows-7-With-Nvidia-GTX-Cards-56737.html

Here's the response:

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Microsoft-Says-Windows-7-Nvidia-GTX-PCs-E3-Were-Xbox-One-Dev-Kits-56834.html

There's also this 'games reporter' noting that some demo kiosks crashed to a standard-issue Windows desktop (like what you'd have on a PC) rather than what you'd get for a console running Windows 8. https://twitter.com/JazRignall/statuses/344967744808185857

One developer responded saying "We just didn't have time to make Xbox1-native versions so we just ran the PC version because we wanted to showcase our game."

-- so, what's the summary? --

We know for sure the demos weren't running all running on XBox One hardware. Some of it was explained to be running on 'pc hardware similar to an xbox one -- development kits' and that despite their considerably more powerful hardware, the machines should have performance similar to the shipping consumer version of the XBox One. Other demos just were the desktop PC version running on pretty good quality hardware because that's all the developer had to showcase.

Make of that what you will.

Nothing was blown out of proportion.

It's just that some people were religiously hurt when the news came out. Whether first party, second party or third party doesn't matter.

I just hope both consoles run games at slightly higher resolution than 720p at least.

Was there negative press and negative internet chatter regarding the X1 games being demoed on PCs  vs the PS4?  There sure was.

 

Is it a bad thing if a console's games are demoed on a pc?  Not if its an accurate display.

 

 

Basically, this is not an issue, but I get why some would like to point out the fact that the ps4 was also not showing everything on actual hardware.  The only 'issue' was the unfair way the topic has been portrayed.  This just illustrates the reality behind all the bs.

 

New gaming consoles in the modern era rely on PCs to demo content before a final retail kit is available.  Sony and MS are following that pattern.

Xbox-One-Games-at-E3-Ran-on-Windows-7-PC

 

 

 

Yes, both consoles had demos of content running on PCs.

 

I know there is some argument over how many X1 or PS4 demos were shown on pc units, but there is no denying that BOTH are doing it.

 

Oh and its not a bad thing.  It wasn't a bad thing when only the X1 was singled out and its not a bad thing now.  Next subject please.

  • Like 2

This console war seems to be taking an interesting twist, I honestly hope they sort any problems they have prior to launch. I have yet to see anything from the PS4 that actually makes me want one.

 

Also to the guy posting PC pictures at X1 booths, how many times do people have to say it was only LocoCycle at E3 on a PC because it hadn't been ported over to the X1. Do people not take information which doesn't line up with their opinion?

This is so laughable... As it has been stated many times over, a TON of demos are done on PC's closely spec'd to the console they will be ported over to.

 

I guess people feel good about their gif's and crap like that...

 

Games will be fine on both the Xbox One and PS4.  People really want the 'gaming' aspect to more that what it will be I guess...

 

Indies want so desperately to be the determining factor this generation, but I can almost see them being in the same role, they were this generation (no a bad thing.  but will not be bigger than what they think)....

 

All the other GOODIES outside of gaming, and how they enhance gaming and such will get peoples attention.

The XB1 will be that good.

 

And people are trying really hard to get MS to fail...

 

Microsoft always seem to be 3 steps ahead (though MS sucks at explaining their forward thinking) and people are trying like nuts to trip them up.

  • Like 2

Microsoft always seem to be 3 steps ahead (though MS sucks at explaining their forward thinking) and people are trying like nuts to trip them up.

All things being equal, then wouldn't they have released their new console last year? Being that the 360 came out a year before the PS3.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      453
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!