Assassin's Creed Unity 900p/30fps on both PS4 and Xbox One
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Most wouldn't find this funny... but when the PS4 and the Xbox One were still relatively new I criticized those mocking the GPU in the Xbox One because I felt like the argument was basically "my console is less crappy than yours". And the reasoning I used was that in premium games the PS4 wasn't holding a stable 60fps even if it was capable of going higher than the Xbox One.
And that wasn't great because 4k/240Hz TV's were already out and NEITHER system was hitting those kind of specs. In other words, both systems really are in the same ballpark in terms of performance even if the PS4 edges out the Xbox One by a margin. And that ballpark is nothing to be excited about. Even at 1080p/60fps you're still behind what TV's are not capable of several fold in resolution (4 times if you count just the width, but actually much worse overall, more like 16x times worse) and 4x behind the times in terms of refresh rates.
Those are multiplicative by the way (so 16x4), even if just rough estimates. The amount of raw CPU and GPU power to go from 1080p/60fps to 4k/240fps would be about 64 times more. Even if you concede 240fps to be ridiculous, 120fps has been on the market in TV's for years, and that still means current gen consoles would need to be about 32 times faster to keep the pace.
What makes the article so funny is that games are being gimped it seems before they even hit the GPU and the article explicitly mentions 4k TV's.
I have to go back to old ways and say... it won't really make a difference to the average user. 720p/30fps looks fine on most TV's, even in the 40-60 inch range as long as you are a few feet away from the screen. 920p is close enough to 1080p it would be hard to tell the difference even up close for most people. The 30fps might be noticeable to some, but probably won't be a deal breaker for anyone.
I'm still thinking that the best move for MS will be if the next Xbox is actually just be a regular Windows PC with the Xbox OS and games that scale based on hardware combined with the ability to play your existing PC games. With upgradeable hardware, the only real piece of the equation missing would be a good tool for accurately rating your system to determine appropriate frame rate and resolution settings so you could evaluate how well a game would play on your machine before purchase.
TV vendors are going to keep pushing the envelope. Even when it isn't needed because they need a reason to combat prices tanking as existing technologies become more mainstream (was the same deal with Smart TV's... no one really cares, but even budget TV's are Smart TV's now just to keep giving people a reason to upgrade without them needing to drop their MSRP). Very few people have a large enough TV for a 4k resolution to make sense. It is already available on TV's less than 50 inches in size!
Most wouldn't find this funny... but when the PS4 and the Xbox One were still relatively new I criticized those mocking the GPU in the Xbox One because I felt like the argument was basically "my console is less crappy than yours". And the reasoning I used was that in premium games the PS4 wasn't holding a stable 60fps even if it was capable of going higher than the Xbox One.
And that wasn't great because 4k/240Hz TV's were already out and NEITHER system was hitting those kind of specs. In other words, both systems really are in the same ballpark in terms of performance even if the PS4 edges out the Xbox One by a margin. And that ballpark is nothing to be excited about. Even at 1080p/60fps you're still behind what TV's are not capable of several fold in resolution (4 times if you count just the width, but actually much worse overall, more like 16x times worse) and 4x behind the times in terms of refresh rates.
Those are multiplicative by the way (so 16x4), even if just rough estimates. The amount of raw CPU and GPU power to go from 1080p/60fps to 4k/240fps would be about 64 times more. Even if you concede 240fps to be ridiculous, 120fps has been on the market in TV's for years, and that still means current gen consoles would need to be about 32 times faster to keep the pace.
What makes the article so funny is that games are being gimped it seems before they even hit the GPU and the article explicitly mentions 4k TV's.
I have to go back to old ways and say... it won't really make a difference to the average user. 720p/30fps looks fine on most TV's, even in the 40-60 inch range as long as you are a few feet away from the screen. 920p is close enough to 1080p it would be hard to tell the difference even up close for most people. The 30fps might be noticeable to some, but probably won't be a deal breaker for anyone.
I'm still thinking that the best move for MS will be if the next Xbox is actually just be a regular Windows PC with the Xbox OS and games that scale based on hardware combined with the ability to play your existing PC games. With upgradeable hardware, the only real piece of the equation missing would be a good tool for accurately rating your system to determine appropriate frame rate and resolution settings so you could evaluate how well a game would play on your machine before purchase.
TV vendors are going to keep pushing the envelope. Even when it isn't needed because they need a reason to combat prices tanking as existing technologies become more mainstream (was the same deal with Smart TV's... no one really cares, but even budget TV's are Smart TV's now just to keep giving people a reason to upgrade without them needing to drop their MSRP). Very few people have a large enough TV for a 4k resolution to make sense. It is already available on TV's less than 50 inches in size!
Comments
Post a Comment