Microsoft Decides to Stop Publishing Console Sales Figures

[Dabombinable]

The Wii U uses a tri-core version of the GameCube CPU.

That's the Wii that uses the overclocked GameCube shit.

Oh. But its still shit.

 

as if the games ar any smaller on PC.....

You're just salty cuz strailia has notoriously bad internet...

Nope. It used to be you inserted a single disk and you were able to start playing straight away, now you have to deal with Installs that easily go up to 60GB and having to download large patches. And the 500GB HDD in the Pisspoor and Xbone don't hold that many games, while my Original Xbox can either play a game off disc, or off its 160GB HDD, which has 49 games taking up 127GB of space.

[dalekphalm]

-snip-

Well. I can see by your comment that you are simply trolling, and cannot have a reasonable discussion or counter my arguments

 

Also, I'm not mad at all. I'm quite amused, if anything, by the ridiculous level of fanboy you made it to. But hey, as they say, "haters gonna hate".

[Dabombinable]

Well. I can see by your comment that you are simply trolling, and cannot have a reasonable discussion or counter my arguments

 

Also, I'm not mad at all. I'm quite amused, if anything, by the ridiculous level of fanboy you made it to. But hey, as they say, "haters gonna hate".

That reminds me:

Fuck the Xbone, and fuck the Pisspoor.

[dalekphalm]

That reminds me:

Fuck the Xbone, and fuck the Pisspoor.

I don't mind people who dislike the current gen consoles, because truly, you can get a superior gaming experience (Cheaper games, more sales, higher performance and graphics), by spending a few hundred more dollars.

 

But it simply makes no sense when someone claims that one of the consoles are shit while the other is amazing. It's baffling.

[Dabombinable]

I don't mind people who dislike the current gen consoles, because truly, you can get a superior gaming experience (Cheaper games, more sales, higher performance and graphics), by spending a few hundred more dollars.

 

But it simply makes no sense when someone claims that one of the consoles are shit while the other is amazing. It's baffling.

Previous generations were good in their own way, the "next gen" consoles are all shit in the same way. Storage, the APU and memory.

[Doobeedoo]

Would like MS to focus on PC only though. Be it in any way to improve experience.

Now, where's my Gears of War series for PC >.<

[Qub3d]

Previous generations were good in their own way, the "next gen" consoles are all shit in the same way. Storage, the APU and memory.

 

 

That reminds me:

Fuck the Xbone, and fuck the Pisspoor.

While I agree that this Gen's consoles aren't great, they do one thing well for me: social gaming. I can't sit in a room with a bunch of my friends and play TF2. (Believe me, i've tried). It's not just things like split screen. The PC is currently modeled toward a single-player per machine expirience, whereas a console can support several players per machine. This is seen in everything from game design to the fact that consoles support multi-input out of the box. 

 

I love my PC. I have a nice custom-built rig in an H440 next to me on my desk. I also love hanging out with my friends and playing some friday-night halo.

[Dabombinable]

While I agree that this Gen's consoles aren't great, they do one thing well for me: social gaming. I can't sit in a room with a bunch of my friends and play TF2. (Believe me, i've tried). It's not just things like split screen. The PC is currently modeled toward a single-player per machine expirience, whereas a console can support several players per machine. This is seen in everything from game design to the fact that consoles support multi-input out of the box. 

 

I love my PC. I have a nice custom-built rig in an H440 next to me on my desk. I also love hanging out with my friends and playing some friday-night halo.

Think of it this way, PC no longer have games that support multiple people per machine-and all of those games that did ran on hardware from the 90's. Its quite possible to have multiplayer split screen on PC-devs just aren't implementing it on PC (3 gameports on my old rig+ the keyboard, and the gameports operated independently). And as for a social gaming, PC does have VOIP and free access to online gaming. Oh and BTW, RIP local multilayer with the Xbone, and more specifically, Halo Guardians. One of the large points in the series since Halo 1 is gone.

[RagnarokDel]

The clickbate-y title of this techradar article is "Has Microsoft admitted defeat in the console sales war?", but it is worth a read. The gist of it is that Microsoft is no longer using console sales as a metric of success, instead looking at Xbox Live figures as the main metric for the user base. 

 

One thing that was brought up in the comments of the TechRadar article is that while Microsoft may be selling less units, it is winning on number of games sold, which is considered to be the really important metric by many. I found a brief article about that here.

PC has won the consoles war.

 

 

From what I can tell, the Xbox live metric still includes Xbox 360 users, so those numbers are still looking bad.

 

39 million users paying 60$(96 when paying monthly) a year means they get 2.34 billion to 3.744 billion revenue from letting people play online.

[Prysin]

While true in many circumstances, this is certainly not a universal rule.

 

More and more, with AAA games, the physical disc often does not contain the full game, or even in some circumstances, simply adds the game to Steam or Origin, and does a full download anyway.

 

Your PS4 fanboyism and bias is quite confusing and very obvious.

 

The PS4 is vaguely faster than the XBOX One. That is a fact. The larger GPU and the GDDR5 unified System Memory do give it a slight edge. But it's a pretty damn small edge.

 

To literally fanboy all over the place like you're doing, over such a small difference? It's bizarre.

 

Software/user experience wise, it's 100% subjective as to whether the PS4 or XBO are superior. Many would claim that the XBO offers a superior user experience. They're neither right nor wrong, since, as I mentioned, it's subjective.

 

A properly built gaming PC is superior to both, hardware wise. Whether the user experience is superior, is debatable. In many cases, for many people, it is better. But some people want the console experience, where things are dirt simple, and don't require troubleshooting very often. PC does not offer that experience very well. For us tech enthusiasts, that's not a problem, since we are capable of searching for solutions to issues, updating GPU Drivers, dealing with Developer Support, etc. Not everyone cares for that.

 

Your continual referral of the XBO as the "fagbox" is quite amusing. It's cute that you think such a tiny difference in performance somehow makes the PS4 a good console, and the XBO a bad one.

Frankly, if you were looking at it objectively, you'd either see them BOTH as poor value and bad pieces of technology, or you would see that they are both similar enough, and provide a similar enough gaming experience, to be good value for someone who is looking for the least amount of hassle for both "hardcore" and casual gaming.

 

I personally exclusively game on PC right now. I've owned many consoles in the past, but PC gaming has always been my dominant gaming platform. But for my friends who aren't tech savvy, consoles offer excellent value to them. Many of them don't want to deal with all of the tiny issues we don't think about when dealing with full PC gaming.

 

 

lets see.... where to being with this fallacy of a post.

 

oh, yes performance difference being small.

PS4: 1840 GFLOPS, 25.6Pix Fill, 57.6 GTex

fagbox: 1310 GFLOPS, 13.6Pix Fill, 40.9 GTex

 

how much of a difference is there?

GLFOPS: PS4 is 33% faster on average

Pixel Fill rate: PS4 is 61% faster on average

GTexels: PS4 is 33% faster on average

 

.... if we were talking about PC parts, like say a GPU. there would be no fucking way you would ever describe 33 to 61% performance difference as "just a little bit"... that is HUGE difference. And it is noticable, very easily so.

 

As for my bias.... well i hate the fagbox for what it is. I hate the controller because it feels wrong. I hate that every single version of the fagbox has been inferior to playstation in some way, thus dragging down consoles in general. I hate the looks of it (damn VCR), i hate the fact that people fawn over it even when it is obviously performing worse.

Fagbox fanboys are much like Apple fanboys in the aspect that they actually go buy an inferior product, hardware wise, just because of brand.... Microsoft can afford to make a better product. They deliberatly dont.

 

Oh, another performance difference between PS4 and fagbox... the PS4 has 8 ACEs, the fagbox has 2.... That means that because devs go by the weakest link when developing, we will probably see a reduced focus on Async Compute/shaders.... if these things are not "buffed" during a port. AMD users, but also Nvidia Pascal users will see lower performance in DX12 then they could have seen. That is not cool.

 

As for hte PS4, i have my griefs with that too, but those are mainly on the UI, software and PSN side... not the hardware and performance side. I havent used the fagbox enough to develop any resentment to their UI or OS. And yes, ive played on the fagbox A LOT... one of my best friends swears to the fagbox, so thats the only gaming console you find in his house...

 

A properly built gaming PC will never be "exceptionally better" for 400 USD...

At a console price point, you CAN NOT TRULY BEAT THEM.... not at their current prices atleast...

 

As for gaming PCs... i have a 2800 USD PC with 1200 USD worth of peripherals... i wouldnt have this PC if i didnt dabble in PC gaming. You on the other hand seem to fail understand that i even HAVE such a setup. Which is fine, its in my signature so it is hard to see...

[Tomsen]

@Prysin

Would like to point out, that the numbers your brought up, is not performance. They are factors to performance, but how they actually influence performance, is not clear. It is certainly not 30-60% "performance" difference.

I personally loved the original xbox controller (haven't had much experience with either PS4 or xbox one). Was sitting much more comfy in my hands (I do have slightly over-sized hands, so that might explain it).

Yes xbox does look like your fat uncle who still thinks he got some game.

[Prysin]

@Prysin

Would like to point out, that the numbers your brought up, is not performance. They are factors to performance, but how they actually influence performance, is not clear. It is certainly not 30-60% "performance" difference.

I personally loved the original xbox controller (haven't had much experience with either PS4 or xbox one). Was sitting much more comfy in my hands (I do have slightly over-sized hands, so that might explain it).

Yes xbox does look like your fat uncle who still thinks he got some game.

 

i know it is not an direct indicator of actual performance. But that is the potential, on average, that can be exploited in the PS4...

If that means the PS4 will be running at higher resolutions then the fagbox, then that matters, a lot.... there is quite a stark contrast between 720p and 900p if you got a 1080p or 4k TV hooked up with the console...

 

As for controllers, they will always be a "love it or hate it" kind of thing. And i respect that.

[Tomsen]

i know it is not an direct indicator of actual performance. But that is the potential, on average, that can be exploited in the PS4...

If that means the PS4 will be running at higher resolutions then the fagbox, then that matters, a lot.... there is quite a stark contrast between 720p and 900p if you got a 1080p or 4k TV hooked up with the console...

 

As for controllers, they will always be a "love it or hate it" kind of thing. And i respect that.

Not necessarily. If we go by there are no other factor that is bottlenecking the total performance, then yes, that would obtainable.

However, if bottlenecking does occur, then you could rise those two factors to whatever. They wont necessarily have any better performance.

However, they wouldn't implement it, if it wasn't beneficial. But again PS4 plays at 1080p whereas xbox plays at some odd random solutionn resolution. But I still have big doubt towards 30-60% performance difference. If so, it would most certainly be in the low-end of that spectrum.

[Swndlr]

That moment when you know Xbone is on the decline

[Prysin]

Not necessarily. If we go by there are no other factor that is bottlenecking the total performance, then yes, that would obtainable.

However, if bottlenecking does occur, then you could rise those two factors to whatever. They wont necessarily have any better performance.

However, they wouldn't implement it, if it wasn't beneficial. But again PS4 plays at 1080p whereas xbox plays at some odd random solutionn resolution. But I still have big doubt towards 30-60% performance difference. If so, it would most certainly be in the low-end of that spectrum.

it is not unikely. Because the PS4 doesnt use its  "main" CPUs (dual Athlon 5350s that are downclocked to keep a super low TDP) for the OS...

the OS itself, and some other functions, run entirely off two ARM cores...

 

while the fagbox does not have such a system and is 100% reliant on its own main CPUs (dual 5350, slightly higher clocked then PS4, but still downclocked VS desktop version) for OS and many other functions alongside the games.

[jaggysnake57]

i saw the title and i laughed

 

 

idiots!

[Tomsen]

it is not unikely. Because the PS4 doesnt use its  "main" CPUs (dual Athlon 5350s that are downclocked to keep a super low TDP) for the OS...

the OS itself, and some other functions, run entirely off two ARM cores...

 

while the fagbox does not have such a system and is 100% reliant on its own main CPUs (dual 5350, slightly higher clocked then PS4, but still downclocked VS desktop version) for OS and many other functions alongside the games.

I would like some confirmation on that, AFAIK, the ARM processor is only used for background task and other trivial task.

AFAIK, it is able to run certain OS task, but I haven't heard it was actually running the OS. Doubt it, but who know.

Just name the core-architecture name (jaguar). There are no desktop versions, but I do know what you mean.

[Prysin]

I would like some confirmation on that, AFAIK, the ARM processor is only used for background task and other trivial task.

AFAIK, it is able to run certain OS task, but I haven't heard it was actually running the OS. Doubt it, but who know.

Just name the core-architecture name (jaguar). There are no desktop versions, but I do know what you mean.

yes, the wikipedia page says so. Some interview in some not so relevant setting (think it was one of the big game conventions), it was mentioned that the ARM CPU handled most of the OS...

 

I know for a fact that during gaming, the ARM core is 100% responsible for the OS functions and also opening the "front menu"... during non gaming, yes the ARM cpu prolly let the main CPUs deal with the system....

[Tomsen]

yes, the wikipedia page says so. Some interview in some not so relevant setting (think it was one of the big game conventions), it was mentioned that the ARM CPU handled most of the OS...

 

I know for a fact that during gaming, the ARM core is 100% responsible for the OS functions and also opening the "front menu"... during non gaming, yes the ARM cpu prolly let the main CPUs deal with the system....

The wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_4_technical_specifications) is saying something in the lines of what I have been saying.

 

The console also includes secondary custom chips that handle tasks associated with downloading, uploading, and social gameplay.[18][19] These tasks can be handled seamlessly in the background during gameplay or while the system is in sleep mode

PS4 includes a secondary ARM processor (with separate 256 MiB of RAM) to assist with background functions and OS features

However, since both are running some cutdown OS, most features, that are irrelevant to the application running, could be offloaded to the ARM core.

[Prysin]

The wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_4_technical_specifications) is saying something in the lines of what I have been saying.

 

However, since both are running some cutdown OS, most features, that are irrelevant to the application running, could be offloaded to the ARM core.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_One

 

unfortunatly for the fagbox. It doesnt feature any additional CPUs... so main CPUs gotta do gaming AND OS/functions

[Tomsen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_One

 

unfortunatly for the fagbox. It doesnt feature any additional CPUs... so main CPUs gotta do gaming AND OS/functions

Might be the reason why microsoft went with a slightly faster CPU and locked 2 cores.

Also believe that xbox have more OS features.

Microsoft have left me completetly confused with their design choices. Whereas sonys have seemed to have a seamlessly design.

I think microsoft went a little overboard on it been more than a gaming-console. Ending up hurting its original purpose.

[GeekJump]

(1) You ppl write damn novels here! You expect me to read all these replies when I can use that time to reread A Song of Ice and FIre?!?

 

(2) I never understood the fanboy(girl) thing about PS4 vs Xbox Sales. Both consoles are outselling their predecessors month after month since they launched. That should be a good thing for both sides of the fan wars.

 

And, while PS4 is selling more consoles, Xbox is selling more games so it's still kinda even I guess....