Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[Rangers]

Its amazing that I usually agree with your posts. But in this case I don't agree with any of you points except your last sentence. I'm probably just old now... But I care much more about overall entertainment in an easy to use package. Movies games tv. I'm not one of these newly minted self righteous types decrying people who have cable... I have fucking cable and I watch it. I watch tv live, I time shift and DVR, I goto movies, I watch movies, I video game, I YouTube. I can finally do all of that in one place. I think its a great ploy... Which doesn't mean it'll work. But I'm glad MS actually made a box that fits my entertainment lifestyle.

More people watch tv than play video games so all the statements we constantly hear about cable cutters is really overblown.

Well one thing is, I dont actually have my own X1 yet. Actually I bought one but havent opened it yet. Was thinking of trying to flip it and then picking one up early next year, but so far as stock seems high enough it doesnt matter. More to the point, just not sure I want to outlay that kind of cash right now, so by leaving it in the box I have the option of returning it, so it's kind of in limbo at least for a couple weeks.

So I cant really say how well everything works. Maybe it's not nearly as bad as the internet makes out and given the amount of people who make it their full time day job to denigrate Xbox, that seems plausible. Admittedly Having not tried it, I have doubts the TV integration can ever fully work smoothly. I think they might have been better served focusing on using the Xbox to deliver content. Which seems to be the future, not cling to cable which could be argued is the past (although I have some doubts for the simple reason of live sporting events).

Personally I'm not even sure I want to be arsed with the TV stuff. Which to me doesn't bode well.

well, X1's have been in stock at Amazon for several hours now. While I'm wary of spin (when console X is in stock, it's because so many were made because the parent company is just so darn competent, when console Y is, it's because it isn't selling, etc). That said, if it continues to remain in stock, as well as the fact I personally spotted 5 X1's freely available at a local wal mart the morning after black friday, it could be the beginning of a mini-WiiU situation for Microsoft.

Whatever happens it'll be fun to watch. Throughout though I've maintained MS has a perfectly excellent plan B available to them (whether they even know it yet), a 299 games focused non-Kinect console. It should be fun to see if/when/how such a thing comes about, and watch the disaster in getting their should such a thing occur, etc.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

I think it's funny how circular the console's are. Every generation they build expansion packs, slots, add-ons, abstracted api's, and generation after generation, none of em ever get used, or if they do, they are total failures. Lets face it, console add-ons will never work, fragmentation is doomed to always fail in this market.

I think the first Kinect worked well enough as an accessory to have that same strategy be valid the second time also. I think having it packed in brings quite little extra that couldn't be done with a 20-30% attach rate. OS could still support it in the same way. I doubt that having it in will allow hugely larger game budgets for Kinect only games, which seem to be more party games etc anyway. The subtle Kinect extras in other games could still be in just as they are today. I'm not saying it would be the same, but it would imo work good enough and help lower the price of the system.

 

[tuna]

C'mon, of course you can make the game work on multiple platforms, just like you can play Devil May Cry today on everything from a tablet to a fully decked out pc.

Do you think iOS DMC4 feel the same as PS3/XB360 DMC4?

 

[joker454]

Do you think iOS DMC4 feel the same as PS3/XB360 DMC4?

No clue, never played it as I don't have any iOS device. But the new DMC plays fine on my ultrabook and on my beefy gaming pc. Tablets have a slightly slower gpu than my ultrabook does and likewise would handle the new DMC just fine, just plug in a joystick to the usb port and off you go. Render engines have had configurable settings for ages now, if they can successfully span a gap as large as my ultrabook and my dual gpu gaming pc then they could handle a two sku xb1 setup just fine.

EDIT: Here's a video in case you were curious how DMC runs on an older tablet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sr4aCxjqOKo . Don't know how to embed a youtube video so I'm just adding the link to it.

 

[tuna]

EDIT: Here's a video in case you were curious how DMC runs on an older tablet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sr4aCxjqOKo .

That is DmC, not DMC4.

But there is not problem making DMC4 for a 15 fps system, you just have to slow down the game a lot. However, the enjoyment would most probably also go down.

 

[joker454]

That is DmC, not DMC4.

But there is not problem making DMC4 for a 15 fps system, you just have to slow down the game a lot. But the enjoyment would most probably also go down.

Here on a more recent tablet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6GpS8snUTlM. It's not 15fps as you can see. The point again being that it's possible to have one game work on a myriad of configurations. In my "xb1" and "xb1 s" case the performance spawn would not be as great as a tablet and gaming pc so it would be even easier. If they can get one game to work perfectly fine on a tablet, ultrabook, pc and gaming pc then yes they can get it to work on an "xb1" and "xb1 s". And that's not even taking into account that my DMC case isn't even optimized for tablets, whereas "xb1" and "xb1 s" version would be so they could remove the most performance busting visual features to get whatever frame rate they want.

 

[tuna]

Here on a more recent tablet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6GpS8snUTlM. It's not 15fps as you can see. The point again being that it's possible to have one game work on a myriad of configurations. In my "xb1" and "xb1 s" case the performance spawn would not be as great as a tablet and gaming pc so it would be even easier. If they can get one game to work perfectly fine on a tablet, ultrabook, pc and gaming pc then yes they can get it to work on an "xb1" and "xb1 s". And that's not even taking into account that my DMC case isn't even optimized for tablets, whereas "xb1" and "xb1 s" version would be so they could remove the most performance busting visual features to get whatever frame rate they want.

I do not think you are getting my point. You can design a game for a system with an unknown frame rate, but then you have to design it differently than you would if you design the game for a system with known and fixed specifications.

You can try it yourself by playing mp cod on a Vita via remote play.

 

[joker454]

I do not think you are getting my point. You can design a game for a system with an unknown frame rate, but then you have to design it differently than you would if you design the game for a system with known and fixed specifications.

You can try it yourself by playing mp cod on a Vita via remote play.

Not really, you just remove visual features to meet framerate. You can get any game today working on a gaming pc or even a phone at 60fps if you downgrade the visuals enough, the gameplay can remain identical. You don't have to change the design at all unless input is dramatically different or something like that. An xb1 to an xb1-s would all be the same input, the same game design would be trivial to get working on both. I don't have a vita so I have no clue about that, but if they are having framerate issues then the problem is elsewhere.

 

[Phil]

That actually just gave me an idea - wouldn't it be possible to develop a render engine (assuming framerate is limited by that and not by game-mechanics or AI) that enhances the games visuals in different layers. If the timer reaches the timelimit for say 60fps (16ms), the game renders what's in the buffer at that point and the render-engine resets for the next frame. If the render-engine is quicker due to better hardware, it progresses further in enhancing the image. That way, depending on the hardware, the game will always output to the specified framerate target but the rendered graphics would be scaled accoardingly. Or would this just yield very erratic results where you might get flicker because the loads change substantially from frame to frame? Just a thought for some of the game developers here.

 

[Bigduo209]

That actually just gave me an idea - wouldn't it be possible to develop a render engine (assuming framerate is limited by that and not by game-mechanics or AI) that enhances the games visuals in different layers. If the timer reaches the timelimit for say 60fps (16ms), the game renders what's in the buffer at that point and the render-engine resets for the next frame. If the render-engine is quicker due to better hardware, it progresses further in enhancing the image. That way, depending on the hardware, the game will always output to the specified framerate target but the rendered graphics would be scaled accoardingly. Or would this just yield very erratic results where you might get flicker because the loads change substantially from frame to frame? Just a thought for some of the game developers here.

I think that's what Killzone Mercenaries does on PS Vita, maintain the framerate at a specific point by scaling the graphics dynamically.

Don't know how many games have done something similar though, but I imagine quite a few developers have or will have done it on multiplatform games at some point.

 

[dagamer]

That actually just gave me an idea - wouldn't it be possible to develop a render engine (assuming framerate is limited by that and not by game-mechanics or AI) that enhances the games visuals in different layers. If the timer reaches the timelimit for say 60fps (16ms), the game renders what's in the buffer at that point and the render-engine resets for the next frame. If the render-engine is quicker due to better hardware, it progresses further in enhancing the image. That way, depending on the hardware, the game will always output to the specified framerate target but the rendered graphics would be scaled accoardingly. Or would this just yield very erratic results where you might get flicker because the loads change substantially from frame to frame? Just a thought for some of the game developers here.

Wipeout for PS3 more or less adjusts screen resolution on the fly to maintain 60fps frame rate. But because everything is whizzing by so fast, you never notice. For most other games, you might be more likely to tell.

 

[Arwin]

It only happens during effects heavy battles anyway.

I think Killzone on Vita also supports that?

 

[Dave Baumann]

Wipeout for PS3 more or less adjusts screen resolution on the fly to maintain 60fps frame rate.

Is there any documentation on that?

 

[Arwin]

Pretty sure there is, was widely discussed at the time. Iirc it decreases vertical res only, in steps until frame rendering time is back within budget, down to 960x1080 if necessary.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Pretty sure there is, was widely discussed at the time. Iirc it decreases vertical res only, in steps until frame rendering time is back within budget, down to 960x1080 if necessary.

You mean horizontal res. Here's the DF interview on the subject.

Digital Foundry: How is resolution adjusted, by how much, and in what circumstances? Is the shift literally frame by frame? What is the relationship between the dynamic resolution system and the tearing of frames in terms of the lack of v-sync?
Studio Liverpool: We dynamically alter the horizontal resolution from 1920 to 1280 in steps of 32 pixels. Even when the game is paused and we modify the resolution in the debugger it is very hard to see a change. It is not enabled at resolutions lower than 1080p. The throttling is only allowed to change by 32 pixels each frame (either up or down). The strategy is not to predict when we will overflow a frame (which is somewhat impossible), but to recover as quickly possible if it happens. On some televisions you can see that the tearing is actually present all the time in the top few pixels of the screen. This is due to the software v-sync implementation used in WipEout HD - this is not 'framing out', it's just missing the true v-sync by a few pixels.

the article reports that there's a SCEE Develop Conference where there was a first official confirmation of Richard's findings if someone wants to Google that.

 

[dagamer]

You mean horizontal res. Here's the DF interview on the subject.
the article reports that there's a SCEE Develop Conference where there was a first official confirmation of Richard's findings if someone wants to Google that.

Again, using the hardware horizontal scaler as much as possible.

 

[Arwin]

Ah, yes, horizontal res obviously. And yeah, the RSX only had that kind of scaling support, right?

 

[BRiT]

Ah, yes, horizontal res obviously. And yeah, the RSX only had that kind of scaling support, right?

I don't know what PS4 offers for scaling, but one approach that hasn't really been touched on is using interlaced horizontal resolution. Its likely difficult to know its there when in motion, but might be a wash in terms of software shading/processing overhead.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't know what PS4 offers for scaling...

It has a two-plane hardware scale-and-composite block much like XB1's 3-plane solution, although we've no details on specifics.

 

[Arwin]

I don't know what PS4 offers for scaling, but one approach that hasn't really been touched on is using interlaced horizontal resolution. Its likely difficult to know its there when in motion, but might be a wash in terms of software shading/processing overhead.

I think part of the reason may be that people tend to be more sensitive to decreased horizontal resolution than decreased vertical resolution - there was some research on this, I vaguely recall.