Charlietus
Newcomer
Didn't Disney ask for 160 milion dollars for the license? 315 milion - 160 milion so 155 millions compared to the first one 120 milion budget for development. That makes more sense to me.
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
Full Spiderman 2 developer credits list here
www.mobygames.com
Marvel Spider-Man 2 credits (PlayStation 5, 2023) - MobyGames
The official game credits for Marvel Spider-Man 2 released on PlayStation 5 in 2023. The credits include 3,820 people.
www.mobygames.com
they spent years talking about xCloud, the cloud this the cloud that, "MS has a more advanced cloud", Xbox One cloud was going to be a thing, it was also one of the most important discussion subjects in the Activision deal, just to completely lose against PS+ Cloud.
Riddlewire
Regular
Did you somehow overlook those latency numbers?
That's a gigantic L for PS+ Cloud in the most important metric of all.
You're basically limited to turn-based strategy games. (and XCloud isn't much better)
Charlietus
Newcomer
The latency numbers for ps premium could just be a higher distance from the server. And even if it wasn't, 8 more milliseconds of latency isn't exactly a deal breaker.
I find this segment quite interesting both in terms of how well the Radeon 7 holds up, but also in terms of the relevance of the missing DX12U features. It would certainly be interesting to see the other side of that argument though by seeing how it performs at playable settings vs its contemporary competitor - the 2080 - in what we now know as games that are VRAM constrained on 8GB GPU's.
Also I'm loving the fact that John and Alex are Star Trek fans!
Also I'm loving the fact that John and Alex are Star Trek fans!
But according to DF, compared to the loss of quality in XCloud, this is relatively a smaller problem in comparison. They also pointed that this latency may vary compared to how close they are to the Sony or MS data centers. They both fare badly. But MS's solution is even further removed from the ideal and how MS marketed their own cloud gaming.
I mean let’s be real. Availability is massive on xcloud. It’s not even comparable. Cloud service is useless if you can’t serve 100,000s of concurrent users. There’s 0 chance PS+ serves that many as they specifically limited it to being ps5 owners only. Xcloud will run on anything with a modern browser. That makes its latency performance over ps5 even more intriguing, as Sony limiting streaming to ps5 you can do some lower level work there.
If the world moves to cloud gaming, you need to serve 200M+ concurrent users. If you want a cloud gaming service, you need availability before power.
Power is just turning up your bitrate and flipping a toggle on resolution. Being able to beam to a user that is using their hardware of choice, controller or no controller on a moving train going 40mph, and then having a great experience: that is what cloud gaming technology should be looking to achieve.
Last edited:
cheapchips
Veteran
Kingmakers interview, with some new footage. If you don't know what this is about, watch the trailer first. 
(although I guess the thumbnail kind of spoils that surprise)
(although I guess the thumbnail kind of spoils that surprise)
8ms is just outright insignificant. How is that a 'gigantic L'?
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Yeah, I may have missed it but I don't recall DF's video mentioning that streaming is only to another PS5 console. Like I have a PS5, I've never streamed a Premium+ game - because I can download those games in full locally too. I get that for some situations there's a benefit to that sure, but essentially they're very different products, and I think that should have gotten a little more attention.
It was there but glossed over very quickly - this only applies to PS5 titles.
PlayStation®Plus | Hundreds of games to download and play, PlayStation classics, game trials and more
Join PlayStation Plus on an Essential, Extra or Premium membership plan and get hundreds of PS4 and PS5 games, online multiplayer, classics catalog, exclusive discounts and more.
www.playstation.com
and for the Non PS5 Titles (this is closer to what most other streaming services have - I believe this is their Gaikai service)
Yea they are very different technological barriers. Having to ensure your packets are getting to a customer that is on the move in a car, a bus, a train, a subway, on any device with a variety of connections, is a very different problem to solve than a fixed network point. It's going to take time, for both of them to get to the point where they are able to deliver cloud gaming to every device everywhere.
MS is not quite there yet, but they're the furthest ahead of anyone. Other streaming companies have kept the scope smaller, which is understandable; until someone can prove that it can be done, it's best to work on streaming to things you know you can make into a successful service. MS just seems intent on boiling the ocean right now.
edit: I just went through the video again, and you're right, he fails to mention that pS5 titles can only be streamed on a ps5.
Last edited:
it turns out that the RX 7900 GRE isn't as good as initially thought. I read that the RX 7900 GRE has been adapted to the chinese market and AMD has been selling it in China for more than a year now, so it's not a new gpu. I was initially hyped about this GPU, but I read that and then I watch this video and I get over it.
Radeon RX 7900 GRE Issues, This GPU Generation Sucks!
Last edited:
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
We don't know the reason for this discrepancy, but DF's results are far more positive for the GRE.
DavidGraham
Veteran
Great video by Tom. UE5 is just rubbish, don't care what anyone says. The performance for the output is just terrible. While lumen and nanite are nice, their performance cost is just a joke. Better to use baked lighting so that we can actually play the game instead of watching a slideshow.
I get your perspective, and it's basically the same argument against ray tracing in general, especially if you're a 'performance first' sort of person.
That said, I think it's wrong to rubbish the entire engine and feature set. You should be more upset that the sort of hardware required to run it well has gotten so expensive. If normal midrange parts were still being sold at midrange prices instead of like $600-800, then you'd probably feel a fair bit differently.
I also think devs need to be mindful of whether their game really needs such advance features in the first place. Many people would rightfully argue this game never needed a remake in the first place. It's still a nice looking indie game in its original form, but clearly the devs have been unsuccessful with other ideas and so are falling back on their minor hit, hoping a visual/next gen revitalization will get them some kind of financial return.
Basically, this is probably one of the worst case games to use an as example to rubbish UE5. It's a widely available engine, so it's not always going to be used in the best ways. That's on the developers, not the engine. I'm confident UE5 will produce some absolute bangers along the way that justify the higher demands.
I get you. My problem is that this is Epics second or 3rd consecutive miss on consoles. UE3 really struggled for a while on consoles. UE4 on the ps4/xb1 was rough especially due to the cpu. Features had to be scaled back. Now with UE5, it's again another feature-set miss. That's 3 strikes and they're out. Theses guys really struggle to develop performant features that can run on console hardware. Even on pc, it's a joke. It's slowly making the 4090 look like a 1440p card.
davis.anthony
Veteran
That is nothing to do with EPIC and everything to do with developer choices.
It's also that the consoles just aren't up to it.
That’s certainly one way to look at it. I don’t agree but that’s ok…
Similar threads
