PS4 GAME ARE ALL ULTRA

[Mira Yurizaki]

Horizon: Zero Dawn isn't exactly that impressive though:

 

 

 

 

And these were from games that could run at near 60FPS on 1080p ultra using a $200 video card a few years ago (well, maybe not in TW3's case at the time of release).

 

But does it cost more to get the same level of fidelity? Sure. But we're not able to access Sony's pricing on parts and other ways to cut corners without sacrificing performance.

[Stefan Payne]

Are that YOUR ingame Screenshots?? If not, the first one looks like a promotional one.

 

And Why are you so hung up on bashing the Consoles??

Because you forgot to mention that the normal PS4 cost just around 250$ - with a 1TB HDD. Show me a PC that can game at the same level for that price.

And the PS4 PRO is a bit more expansive and cost 'just' around 400$ - with more than double the graphics hardware and a bit more clock on the rest...

[Godlygamer23]

1 hour ago, Stefan Payne said:

Maybe but does it matter if you can't play it at all?!
Especially Horizon Zero Dawn is a really awesome game, you should try it too.

 

And for the Hardware:
PS4 Pro has a Polaris like GPU (+ a couple of VEGA Fatures) with a low clocked 8 core CPU.

So it's not that bad. You need at least a graphics card wich costs more than the console to just compete with it...

This only applies to exclusive titles on the PS4. Any mutli-platform games lose out on the higher quality versus PC.

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

This only applies to exclusive titles on the PS4. Any mutli-platform games lose out on the higher quality versus PC.

Well, no

There are a couple of titles that offer no optical/performance benefit on the PC. Some don't even allow for higher resolution than 1080p.

 

So your statement is just not true.

For a couple of games.

Most Koei Tecmo Games on PC for example.

[Mira Yurizaki]

18 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Are that YOUR ingame Screenshots?? If not, the first one looks like a promotional one.

No. While I'm aware bullshots exist, I also played the game and it does look pretty detailed.

Quote

And Why are you so hung up on bashing the Consoles??

I'm not bashing consoles. I'm merely trying to point out your assessment of what consoles can do isn't as great as you think it is.

 

I mean I could turn it around and ask why you're bashing PC gaming.

Quote

Because you forgot to mention that the normal PS4 cost just around 250$ - with a 1TB HDD. Show me a PC that can game at the same level for that price.

And the PS4 PRO is a bit more expansive and cost 'just' around 400$ - with more than double the graphics hardware and a bit more clock on the rest...

I'm not, because I'm well aware that there is no PC as of the timestamp of this post that can produce the same features as the PS4. However you have to understand that Sony has access to certain things that people cannot get that makes the comparison less effective.

 

And again, we could turn this around and go "but the PS4 doesn't have a vast library of games stemming back all the way from the early 90s, not to mention the variety of ways it can run other platform's games". I mean for roughly $500 you can play games on the same level as the PS4, and then go right around and play games before the PS4's time that the PS4 can't ever hope to run. At least not until Sony makes local backwards compatibility a thing.

 

PC vs. console arguments are a colossal waste of time. But I still like talking about it once in a while.

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, Stefan Payne said:

Well, no

There are a couple of titles that offer no optical/performance benefit on the PC. Some don't even allow for higher resolution than 1080p.

 

So your statement is just not true.

For a couple of games.

Most Koei Tecmo Games on PC for example.

Bear in mind I did not say the PC version looked better or played better. I am simply stating that once you hit the multi-platform area, the PS4 loses its graphical superiority. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

And look, I don't hate consoles. I think consoles are at times necessary because when given constraints, engineers can do amazing things. I'd argue a great many a graphics features we like to boast on PC gaming had roots in some form of console game development. I hold the Nintendo 64 in the highest regard as far as being one of the greatest pieces of gaming hardware because of the potential of what it could do and what the developers did do.

 

However, I'm not going to ignore that they have their limitations and magically beat something that has over twice the power. A lot of what you think you're seeing is smoke and mirrors and a great art direction.

[Stefan Payne]

2 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

No. While I'm aware bullshots exist, I also played the game and it does look pretty detailed.

I posted MY screenshot of Horizon Zero Dawn. You did not.

It would be nice if you would argue with your own screenshots - or at least screenshots from people you know...

 

2 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I'm not bashing consoles. I'm merely trying pointing out your assessment of what consoles can do isn't as great as you think it is.

It is.

But for an XBox or PS4 game, they have to be developed for the weaker originals, not for the refreshes!

Especially with the new XBoner the difference in hardware is enormous - +50% more RAM, more than 4,5 times the Memory Bandwith (yeah yeah, there was a 32MiB Cache wich was rather useless), and +30% more CPU Clock.

And somewhat in the ballpark of double the graphics thingy...

 

That's almost a new generation!
 

With the PS4 PRO the most noticable difference is the graphics hardware, the rest is just a bit faster....

 

So the problem is that we are comparing titles thar are made for the old generation...

 

2 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I mean I could turn it around and ask why you're bashing PC gaming.

Because there is so much bullshit going round that you don't really want to deal with it.

Especially all that proprietary bullcrap in some games...

 

And one of the advantages is that you can make the game much easier on PC than on consoles

 

 

2 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Bear in mind I did not say the PC version looked better or played better. I am simply stating that once you hit the multi-platform area, the PS4 loses its graphical superiority. 

That statement also is not true because, as I said earlier, there are a couple of games that don't offer any advantages in the PC version.

And I also mentioned many examples of a software company -> KOEI TECMO. If it is from them and before 2016 or so, it most likely will not offer a resolution above 1080p...

I'm not sure about NIER Automata and there is a ton of other stuff...

 

So it depends on the game and content.

 

And there are many games, that do NOT offer any improvement on the PC.

[Mira Yurizaki]

35 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

I posted MY screenshot of Horizon Zero Dawn. You did not.

It would be nice if you would argue with your own screenshots - or at least screenshots from people you know...

I don't see how getting my own screenshots adds or detracts from the argument I'm making. You may as well null and void anyone who cites someone else because they didn't do the research or know the person who did do it.

 

Quote

It is.

But for an XBox or PS4 game, they have to be developed for the weaker originals, not for the refreshes!

Especially with the new XBoner the difference in hardware is enormous - +50% more RAM, more than 4,5 times the Memory Bandwith (yeah yeah, there was a 32MiB Cache wich was rather useless), and +30% more CPU Clock.

And somewhat in the ballpark of double the graphics thingy...

 

That's almost a new generation!
 

With the PS4 PRO the most noticable difference is the graphics hardware, the rest is just a bit faster....

 

So the problem is that we are comparing titles thar are made for the old generation...

The PS4 Pro uses a non-boosting RX 480. The XB1 uses a non-boosting RX 580. That alone gives us more than enough information to make guesses on what it can and can't do. And while you can claim consoles should have better performance because it's lighterweight on the OS side than PCs, I have no reason to believe that is really true. I investigated the performance difference between a fresh vanilla Windows 10 install and a "as safely as I could strip it down" version which cut RAM usage by 36% and lowered the number of processes by a handful and the performance was within a margin of error.

 

So with that I think it's fair to compare the performance of PC hardware directly against PS4/XB1. Especially the XB1 since it's running Windows 10 anyway.

Quote

Because there is so much bullshit going round that you don't really want to deal with it.

Especially all that proprietary bullcrap in some games...

You do realize the PS4 runs on a proprietary version of FreeBSD and using a proprietary API?

 

Oh and the PS4 version of Final Fantasy XV uses NVIDIA GameWorks (I'm still reeling in the irony of this...)

Quote

And one of the advantages is that you can make the game much easier on PC than on consoles

No it's not. Consoles are easier by virtue of having a very limited set of variables to screw things up. Everyone runs the same hardware (more or less), using the same OS, with the same system configuration. In PCs, you have a near limitless combination of hardware and software. Doing one thing on a PC with one set of hardware won't necessarily work, or worse, degrade the performance, on another machine. Case in point, optimizations for NVIDIA or AMD tend to be mutually exclusive because their architectures have differing philosophies on how you should submit work. And now with Ryzen, the OS has to be mindful of which CCX its running a thread on because if the thread has to access something on another CCX, it's going to result in a performance hit.

 

I mean, it might be easier up front, like you don't have to go to Sony, ask for a dev unit, pay the sum of a decent car for a license to make a game on their system, but the actual development work isn't "much easier" on a PC.

[Stefan Payne]

8 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I don't see how getting my own screenshots adds or detracts from the argument I'm making. You may as well null and void anyone who cites someone else because they didn't do the research or know the person who did do it.

Respect? Valuing the opponent and knowing the screenshot is real and not some photosphopped mockup like the first one of the screenshots you posted.

And the filename of the Witcher 3 Screenshot is more than questionable...

 

The other two, you did not even mention what game it is or where...

And also the type of content. I did post one from about an hour or two of playtime - and there are much more beautiful scenes in Horizon Zero Dawn.

And because of the setting of the game, there can't be a jungle...

Besides, here another two screenshots of the game:

 

Quote

The PS4 Pro uses a non-boosting RX 480. The XB1 uses a non-boosting RX 580.

They do _NOT_.

It would be nice if you would stop posting things that are false.

The PS4 Pro does NOT have a 100% Polaris based GPU as I stated earlier, it has some features that the RX480/580 does NOT have. 

Like double FP16 Performance - Only VEGA has that in the PC Mainstream Desktop, Polaris does NOT.

 

Quote

"One of the features appearing for the first time is the handling of 16-bit variables - it's possible to perform two 16-bit operations at a time instead of one 32-bit operation," he says, 

Source:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-inside-playstation-4-pro-how-sony-made-a-4k-games-machine

 

Quote

That alone gives us more than enough information to make guesses on what it can and can't do. And while you can claim consoles should have better performance because it's lighterweight on the OS side than PCs, I have no reason to believe that is really true.

No, because consoles have static hardware, one CPU architecture from one Manufacturer.

One GPU from one Manufacturer. (OK, now there are two for Playstation, Two for XBox)

You can optimize and focus only on that.

On a PC you have at least 3 completely different generations of AMD CPUs you have to take care of -> Phenom II, Bulldozer and now Zen.

Intel isn't as bad as they haven't changed much in the last 10 years, so Code for Bloomfield works well on todays Intel CPUs.

 

 

And with the graphics cards, they are also rather similar.

 

While the Hardware on PC is completely differnt and some companys don't optimie as much - and you can mess up the performance of the other if you optimize on one hardware alone.

 

 

Quote

So with that I think it's fair to compare the performance of PC hardware directly against PS4/XB1. Especially the XB1 since it's running Windows 10 anyway.

You do realize the PS4 runs on a proprietary version of FreeBSD and using a proprietary API?

Yes, and?? 

The APIs are what matters!

That's why consoles offered better performance although their hardware was not as good as the PC hardware...

 

And that's what I was saying.

Quote

Oh and the PS4 version of Final Fantasy XV uses NVIDIA GameWorks (I'm still reeling in the irony of this...)

Maybe, but you can expect that Gameworks for Consoles does not mess up the performance of the effects as it does on PC.

The statement of the Witcher 3 lead programmer was pretty clear on Gameworks, as far as he could take it, without getting into trouble.

Source:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-inside-playstation-4-pro-how-sony-made-a-4k-games-machine

 

2 Thinks are especially important:

Quote

We are thinking to implement it, but that decision is to be honest less on the programmer's side and more a Buissness decision.

(...)

PCGH: Will the hair and fur simulation run on Radeon GPUs?
Balázs Török: Yes, yes it should. At the moment it works, but if it will work in the end, is the decision of Nvidia,

Need to say more?

That's really negative comments in this regard - as negative as he could possibly say it, without getting into trouble...

 

 

 

Quote

No it's not. Consoles are easier by virtue of having a very limited set of variables to screw things up.

Yes it is.

There are ways to make a game easier on PC than it is for consoles!

With consoles, you have to deal as it is, no way to modify anything, not the savegames, not inject code to memory, on the PC you can.

 

Quote

Everyone runs the same hardware (more or less), using the same OS, with the same system configuration. In PCs, you have a near limitless combination of hardware and software. 

"Limitless configurations" was a thing in the past, when there was really a choice between components and not much drivers going on.

Today it's just a "blast from the past" and just not true anymore.

Today you either have one of 3 AMD architectures or an Intel Chip.

And either a GCN based system or nVidia Kepler and later. Older things you don't really need to worry about these days.

And the only other difference is the performance.

But from an architectural point of view, the differences between PC components aren't that huge...

 

The biggest one is between Bulldozer and anything else.

 

And this "nVidia vs AMD War" is what pisses people off and getting them to get a console instread of a new gaming PC - cheaper, less worrysome, less headaches.

And they don't have to worry about shit being badly optimized so that they have another graphics cards if it doesn't work with the one you have...

 

Like NIER - Automata @PC.

The nVidia (mostly GTX 970) users are complaining about performance issues, new AMD Cards had problems with freezes/lockups, but old GCN1 Cards (like the original) ran amazing/fine. So I played it with one of my older Tahitis...

[sun2]

13 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Yes and that's what the Low(er) Level APIs like DX12 and Vulkan are for, to bring the PC closer to the consoles. If there wasn't some manufacturers trying to sabotage that, including their proprietary crap, we would see PS4 like graphics on PS4 like Hardware.

 

But right now you have to throw much more hardware at the problem to be roughly equal to the PS4 hardware...

And a PS4 is just a Pitcairn with two 4 core Jaguars - like a low clocked Zen - at around 1,6GHz... 

 

That some games might run a bit better on a 4GHz CPU that alone cost more than the console (non pro) with a graphics card that cost at least twice as much, should be obvious, shoudn't it?!

 

And remember that there are NO PS4 PRO Exclusive games yet. So much of the performance of the PS4 can not be used though a bit can be. And there still is the Boost mode...

 

And for entertainment, a Horizon Zero Dawn pic:

 

That's in Quality mode on PS4 PRO...

It looks good for sure. But the game is not that impressive imho, and there are screenshots that do the game more justice then that one. Especially if i would compare it to Witcher or Crysis or other PC games.The face/hair and rocks on the left for instance are just bland. Like really wtf, model reminds me of a THPS model. The draw distance as you can see is limited as well, they used a nice fog effect to make it less messy. Well fire as always is ugly, something developers having a hard time to render. I like the anti aliasing on the trees and grass, but i think it has more to do running on a higher resolution then actual AA. Because ive seen worse spots.

 

And the game the runs on 30fps. Sorry but thats just too low, and i have no problem with people dont minding it and telling its fine or a stable fps. But there's just more cons then pro's with such a framerate, and we dont have to go over them and defend that..

 

And i dont think the PS4 pro renders Horizon Zero Dawn at native 4k. I think Guerilla Games uses some rendering techniques, just as they did with Killzone ShadowFall.

The graphics are high, but not like the high end PC settings. There's is enough screenshots to compare^ But there is also a huge price gap between them. For the price and performance its doing very well.

 

Actual 4k screenshots: https://kbmod.com/2015/05/4k-showcase-the-witcher-3/

 

And personally im not up for a another generation of 30fps and rendering scale techniques. And i doubt even the xbox one X will have native 4k support. Every title they mentioned on E3 with 4k. Was either; 4k 60fps native for mincraft, other just 4k(rendering which also called 4k), or 60fps with no resolution mentioned. They were very carefull about their words. So clearly we get a another generation of resolution rendering or 30fps or lesser demanding titles. Great stuff for inovation^

 

 

[Stefan Payne]

20 minutes ago, sun2 said:

And the game the runs on 30fps. Sorry but thats just too low,

 

 

It's not that fast paced like a shooter so you can easily live with it...

 

But there is also a huge price gap between them. For the price and performance its doing very well.

Yes and that's always dismissed/ignored, the price of the device needed to play it on...

 

Yes, PC can look better - but at what cost? thrice the price of the PS4 PRO?? Or more?

[PlayStation 2]

All depends on the game. For instance, Battlefield 1 runs with a dynamic resolution of something like 1600x900 to 1776x1000 at a mix of medium and high settings.

[Guest lilbman]

On 8/27/2017 at 2:03 PM, sohail14 said:

what about think uncharted lost legasy and horizon zero? better than pc?

Not.  Even.  Close.  A medium-low range PC with a 1050Ti and a i5-7500 will beat out a PS4 in games any day.

 

The base Playstation isn't powerful at all.  

[SteveGrabowski0]

Console settings are usually somewhere around PC high, but most of the time at half the framerate of course.

[SteveGrabowski0]

On 8/29/2017 at 2:33 AM, Stefan Payne said:

Like NIER - Automata @PC.

The nVidia (mostly GTX 970) users are complaining about performance issues, new AMD Cards had problems with freezes/lockups, but old GCN1 Cards (like the original) ran amazing/fine. So I played it with one of my older Tahitis...

Man NieR Automata plays so badly on my 970. I had to put a hidden setting to medium to get 60 fps at 1080p for something whose graphics look on par with a good PS3 game. And yet the game is a masterpiece and the best thing I have played since Bloodborne so I'm willing to look past the bugs, ridiculously bad performance, lackluster graphics, and occasional crashes. Such great action, such a memorable soundtrack, and maybe the best story since Bioshock Infinite or The Last of Us back in 2013. I even bought it a second time (this time for PS4) since I wanted a physical copy and to be able to play it again later without fucking around with tweaking it to run properly on my PC.