Yes, to 4K!
Stop shitting on this company, it makes stuff like this...
This isn't Microsoft!
Gaming PlayStation 4 (Console)
- Thread starter Biscuit1871
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yes, to 4K!
Stop shitting on this company, it makes stuff like this...
This isn't Microsoft!
Yes, to 4K!
Stop shitting on this company, it makes stuff like this...
This isn't Microsoft!
Hey, I'm a PlayStation fan, I've never owned an Xbox in my life. I just wondered what the deal was. It's basically an updated version of what I have with dual play then, only by upscaling to 4k before the split, both players get an HD image after the split, whereas mine is HD before the split, and not as defined after. Right?
I've no fecking idea how impressive that thing above is by the way, but it looks shit. Is it supposed to be a camera of some sort?
It's a 4K TV camera. You don't want to see the 16K one for making films.
That's very good, but what about simulview? Was what I asked right?
Simulview is where they use the 3D technology to provide two totally different views to two viewers. Instead of producing a 3D image, they show two totally different ones. It's just that they did it in 4K - basically 1080p x 4 - with GT5. Now, they have shown GT5 in 4K a long time ago, but it required 4 PS3s to do it, Simulview if at 60fps would require at least 8 under a TV.
Yeah, but the picture isn't 4k when split though, right? It splits to a full HD picture for each viewer.
Stop making it sound more fecking difficult.
Stop making it sound more fecking difficult.
I think that they showed GT5 in simulview at 4K for each player. This was CES, they were showing off 4K TVs, it's likely that it wasn't running off PS3s.
There is no way that a bank of 4 PS3s would produce 2 totally different views at even 1080px2.
Ah right, I thought it was just 4k for the initial image, and HD with the split.
My 3d TVs is an HD image before it splits with the dualplay, so it's not as clear when you're watching through the glasses.
No idea. I know the dual play on mine spits out a pretty basic image after the split.
You'll be happy with your PS4.
Hope so.
So it's basically old technology, dressed up and sold full price as new? Where have we seen this before?
Anyway is Cell the CPU then? And you do realise if that's the case, then even if it's again more powerful than the Xbox, it'll still be dragged to it's level won't it?
I wonder if they'll make any profit on it this time...
Weaste, do you think it's a big jump for the gaming industry to keep up with PS4?
I mean, all those tech are only worth it when there are actually games that utilises it right?
I mean, all those tech are only worth it when there are actually games that utilises it right?
What do you mean, the 4K stuff? Weaste will beable to shed more light on it, but I highly doubt the PS4 will be pushing much in that regards, much like the PS3 and 3D.
In terms of graphics, no. The leap isn't that big and it'll be comparitive to todays mid-high level pc. Though, of course, games will look a lot better because they'll be made specifically for the new machines (not just, say far cry 3 with ridiculous resolutions and AA).
ic. thanks for that. I might be tempted to buy the PS4, probably not on the first release, I'll probably buy it 1 year onwards when they're bit more stable and the games are coming out.
Although, i feel that gaming tends to move into who's got the better graphic, it looks posh on the display department, but honestly... gameplay wise I haven't seen any groundbreaking games lately.
I wish they'd put more into developing a new gameplay, nowdays every new games felt like playing the same old games in a new skin.
Well these new machine can push 1080p @ 60fps easily with better graphics, so that's a good start. On top of that, they'll beable to do even better physics and A.I.
However, don't expect either physics or A.I to move on at all (the latter down to there being no need to, since games are less complex in those terms and no-one really pushes it). It's all about what sells, and what sells right now is simplistic games with flashy graphics, so that's what we shall get (with the odd exception of course, but even those won't be amazingly different).
It's same old, same old, in high definition. But of course, I shall own one and be suckered in yet again
Look at the PSN store. Stuff like Limbo and Journey are very different to what usually gets released on consoles. The walking dead, though not unique is pretty different to most games out there.
APU has 4 steamroller cores in it. Bandwidth to the GDDR5 is high. Cell runs the show (OS, security, IO, etc.) and also acts as a satellite/accelerator processor for the steamroller cores. APU has access to the XDR in a similar way that RSX does.
Of course.
Exactly, people say they want groundbreaking fresh ideas but they also want them spoon fed to them and aren't willing to actually go out and find the games they supposedly want.
Don't forget Lambs, the SCC has its own RAM. It's basically a 3.5GB memory box. APU can't pull/address this, Cell can.
It's basically what the PS3 should have been with a high quality GPU (with very high bandwidth - RSX never had this) and some x86 cores added in for good measure.
3 ISAs
Doesn't matter, the x86 cores can deal with the ports, no problem, if you don't want to use the Cell, no bother, however, if you do..... you will find a hungry little bitch, 8 SPEs this time, not 7.
It's basically a 3.5GB memory box. APU can't pull/address this, Cell can.It's basically what the PS3 should have been with a high quality GPU (with very high bandwidth - RSX never had this) and some x86 cores added in for good measure.
3 ISAs
Doesn't matter, the x86 cores can deal with the ports, no problem, if you don't want to use the Cell, no bother, however, if you do..... you will find a hungry little bitch, 8 SPEs this time, not 7.
So, what you are saying is - the graphics won't be that much of an improvement?
Well they will be, but not drastic leaps visually as it's getting harder and harder for the average gamer to tell.
There's not a great deal new on the horizon graphically, so hopefully we'll see 1080@60fps and go back to basics with higher geometry counts and texturing (obviously if memory allows it) and much better lighting.
When I say they'll not be quite as good as today's pc, that doesn't mean the graphics won't look better than they have to this point. Remember PC games at the minute are just higher res versions of console games with better texturing and AA. They are still made with current consoles in mind so looking at it that way won't do justice to what the next gen of consoles will do.
If that makes sense to you.
Don't forget Lambs, the SCC has its own RAM.
It's basically what the PS3 should have been with a high quality GPU (with very high bandwidth - RSX never had this) and some x86 cores added in for good measure.
3 ISAs
Doesn't matter, the x86 cores can deal with the ports, no problem, if you don't want to use the Cell, no bother, however, if you do..... you will find a hungry little bitch, 8 SPEs this time, not 7.
Yeah, the PS3.5
I get it, my brother has a PC with an amazing graphics card that can run almost any game on high res. He bought it almost 3 years ago, if PS4 can match up to that kind of level of detail - i would be happy.
BTW out of genuine interest Weaste, how do you think M$ will counter that memory use?
We know they'll undoubtedly know all about the PS4, and it's in no-one's interest to have both machine widely apart in power and perhaps most importantly memory use (for cross engines), so best educated guess?
I mean we know the reason the PS3 was held back was the brute force of the 360 forced engines to run in a certain way, and only the dedicated games on the PS3 stand out, surely by doing this Sony are trying to cover both bases this time? In which case I'd expect M$ to still go brute force, plenty of cache and just force engines into their way again?
We know they'll undoubtedly know all about the PS4, and it's in no-one's interest to have both machine widely apart in power and perhaps most importantly memory use (for cross engines), so best educated guess?
I mean we know the reason the PS3 was held back was the brute force of the 360 forced engines to run in a certain way, and only the dedicated games on the PS3 stand out, surely by doing this Sony are trying to cover both bases this time? In which case I'd expect M$ to still go brute force, plenty of cache and just force engines into their way again?
Well yes and no. We won't just be seeing updated games with resolutions, there's no point in that, we shall see higher degrees of things like Lighting, post processing, texture filtering and none graphic stuff like physics (even more boxes lying around levels
) so the games will look prettier. Your brothers PC is currently showing today's console games how they should look, it's not necessarily currently showing what the next generation of games will look like, that completely depends on the individual game and if it has a specific PC version. I think the closest way to see this is to get a heavily modded game like Skyrim on it and mod it with some of the graphics updates, lighting mods and anything else that change the look via actually graphic techniques/higher res textures, rather than alters it. That goes some way to showing how much better games can look.
I don't know much about the Microsoft console other than it's sort of going the Wii U route of lack of latency over bandwidth, Sony are sticking with bandwidth as the priority.
weaste, how the hell do you know so much?!
Quite a lot of the lads I knew at university went into the gaming industry.
I'm sort of also in it myself.
It's a 4K TV camera. You don't want to see the 16K one for making films.
4 megapixel isn't that impressive, my iPhone has a better lens than that.
Come on, bite bitch!
No!
Personally I would like to castigate you for bringing up that piece of shit in a Sony thread, but to be honest I think actually owning one is punishment enough...
One thing that interests me in the Microsoft vs Sony debate is independent developers porting their software to both consoles. Obviously there was some problems in porting to the PS3 which delayed some titles but surely if either Microsoft or Sony do manage to build a console that is vastly superior to the other in terms of ease of developing and also in terms of potential capabilities where does it leave these independent companies in terms of developing games for both consoles? Is the goal for Sony and Microsoft to get them to make a choice and dedicate their software to their console?
This is what I was talking about earlier, it will be very surprising if it doesn't go the way of the 360/PS3. The PS3 is potentially the more powerful of the two, IF used properly, however the 360 had raw grunt and DirectX. What happens is the PC or 360 is normally the lead machine to develop on, because that's what people know and that's what gets the result quickest. A PS3 version is therefore specific and costs more money to port too, hence why it was rarely dedicated and hence why most ports are lesser on it. Yes it was more powerful, but to access that power cost, and lets face it who is going to pay that money if the publishers can push more or less identical versions anyway?
Sony look to have (finally) learned their lesson and given both ways, power and possibly simplicity (if they've also learned how to develop tools too). However with the addition of the Cell, but not as a main part it will possibly be the one tipping point to blow the 720 out of the water.
However, since M$ would be aware of this, they'll have no doubt beefed their machine up to suit, since neither side can afford to be infront or behind by too much, especially this time around. It doesn't actually benefit anyone by one console being supreme over the other (not either company, publishers or engine developers), apart from maybe fanboys.
What we should see is once again consoles evenly matched, however hopefully by now, Sony can stop being shit in the areas they have been and give us a console that can be fully utilised.
I just wish the PS4 would have a backward compatibility with older PS3 games, and probably throws the old PS2/1 games downloadble at a slash price (which I would gladly enjoy, seeing there are many nostalgic titles back then)