Support NeoGAF

[enMTW]

Stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself.

Splinter Cell launched as an Xbox exclusive. The PS2 port was widely mocked as looking many times worse. Same deal with Resident Evil 4.

 

[FunkyPajamas]

So we have list wars for two separate generations going on in this thread? Man, I love this place.

 

[WarWolf]

It does boot and you can move without a keyboard but good luck talking to people without one. Or selecting things quickly. It's no Phantasy Star in having lots of affordances for the console built into the games design. That's my point. It's a PC MMO through-and-through.

What do you mean selecting things quickly? That worked fine on controller. I'd say it most certainly was developed being console friendly. I don't think the Japanese would have rushed out to play it on PC.

The keyboard was only needed for communication. Everything else was completely manageable with a controller alone.

 

[bwakh]

I don't think Amazon was allowing pre-orders while the PS4 was sold out. This would have been briefly after launch. 'Item Unavailable'

Indeed, but the ratio of preorders was quite heavily in PS4's favor. Coupled with historical preorder sales all through from June, it isn't unreasonable that the PS4 charted higher during launch window.

 

[enMTW]

What do you mean selecting things quickly? That worked fine on controller. I'd say it most certainly was developed being console friendly. I don't think the Japanese would have rushed out to play it on PC.

The keyboard was only needed for communication. Everything else was completely manageable with a controller alone.

This is hard, as it has been so long since I've played the game, but I found it hard to select different, err.. abilities (i think?) with the controller. That worked better on the PC.

It was friendly, but it wasn't 'phantasy star' friendly. It was clearly harder to play on a controller than it was with a PC (IN MY OPINION)

Indeed, but the ratio of preorders was quite heavily in PS4's favor. Coupled with historical preorder sales all through from June, it isn't unreasonable that the PS4 charted higher during launch window.

That's weighting. Someone came in here and explained how Amazon does charts. They are, as I thought, absolutely bizarre. The charts should start for nothing, with no weights, every hour. Then you publish the list of 'winners' every 24 hours.

 

[le.phat]

I firmly disagree with the exclusives comment (many of them don't fit my personal tastes) but yes.

There isn't a substantial gap between the Xbox One and PS4 graphical fidelity either. Lots of PS3 ports ran at a lower resolution or with slightly worse textures, but that kind of stuff matters 'on the internet' and no where else. So long as the game you want is available and it doesn't run at, say, sub-20 FPS, it doesn't matter.



It's fine. Just trying to inject some civility here.

The Order begs to differ. By a landslide.

 

[Steroyd]

Splinter Cell launched as an Xbox exclusive. The PS2 port was widely mocked as looking many times worse. Same deal with Resident Evil 4.

And MGS2 was mocked on the Xbox, but I don't call the PS2 a generation above Xbox because of it.

 

[Kezen]

It's MS' definition apperently.

I was just arguing semantics because in truth it should not really matter to MS if said game is available on PC as long as it's not on PS4, the Xbox One's direct competition.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

They are things that define a new era. New features, better graphics.

Doesn't meet the requirements. That's a game that was ported to the PS2 from PC, abandoned (the slim doesn't support the game) after the fact, and was very 'janky' (the hard drive being something you attached yourself, was the only game (in the US) that required it, the game has its own account system (nothing system level)

The big thing, of course, is 'matchmaking', which an MMO isn't going to have. We all agree that matchmaking is a must now, right? We got an early taste of what we would see in 360 games with Halo 2's matchmaking system.

I get that it wasn't as if Sony had nothing and MS had nothing, but the difference between Halo 2 and what was going on in PS2land feels like a generational leap. Matchmaking, man! System-level account system! DLC vending handled by the OS and not the game itself. It was different.



I've been banged in the head so many times for that comment. Please understand, I was wrong. I was blinded by my own taste.

Yeah but it's a problem you keep repeating. You talk about graphics during Gen 6, then when people bring up PS2 games that are graphically comparable you move the goal post and talk about stuff like DLC, matchmaking and voice chat.

You are suspicious of Amazon chart tracking being a reliable predictor of sales claiming a broken clock is right twice a day even though it was pointed out to you that the Amazon charts have correctly predicted console sales 14 months in a row. You move the goal post by claiming a general distrust by how they come by their numbers.

You say there is a bigger power gap between the Xbox 360 and PS3 than the PS4 and Xbox One. People told you all the reasons you were wrong. You claimed the Xbox 360 had twice the RAM - it doesn't (it has the same as PS3). You claimed multiplatform games were the best way to judge power difference and used the first half of last generation to prove the Xbox 360, yet people rebuked that claim by showing the last half has shown parity and the big difference between PS3 exclusives and Xbox 360 exclusives - you compared a 2009 game (Killzone 2) with a 2013 game (Halo 4). People explained that the CELL processor and general architecture of the PS3 is why multiplatform games performed worse for years on the PS3 and that after developers understood how to code for it that the PS3 was arguably slightly more powerful.

People listed the specs, granular specs, of each console and how the PS4 is more powerful in (I believe) every stat. People listed games that had a clear resolution difference almost always favoring the PS4, and you say it looks the same to you.

Dude, it's easy to see what you are doing. Simply put, you are doing a really poor job of hiding your obvious biases.

I'm on my phone or I'd take the time to actually quote the countless instances of lying or goalpost moving.

 

[Dragonborn]

I was just arguing semantics because in truth it should not really matter to MS if said game is available on PC as long as it's not on PS4, the Xbox One's direct competition.

And it doesn't matter to Sony if a game is on PC as long as it's not on the Xbox One, it'd direct competition.

 

[Stanng243]

Sorry, not trying to do a list war.

he was asking which one had a better lineup, so I just make a quick comparative list (not meant to be comprehensive).

Please name any games I am missing, and I will update.

Tropico 5, Toukiden: Kiwami and Omega Quintet all come to mind.

 

[enMTW]

And MGS2 was mocked on the Xbox, but I don't call the PS2 a generation above Xbox because of it.

I don't remember MGS2's port looking worse. I do remember a port with lots of technical issues (and missing content), but they weren't the Xboxes fault. The Xbox is a generation beyond the PS2 - it's not even close.

I don't understand why this is in contention now. Does someone have a chart giving percentages to the power difference?

 

[Apathy]

I am arguing that because it is obviously designed around that keyboard - no alternate way to input original text, no alternate way to quicklyn select inventory items (and don't forget that almost no games used the keyboard) that it led as a PC game.

You can tell. It's something you can feel, what the design decisions were made around. Like how a console FPS ported to PC feels different than a FPS built for PC.

They did try to make it console friendly, that we both agree on. They didn't design it to be console first in the way that Phantasy Star was.

This is an impossible thing to prove - as it is what you feel -, but it is something that reviewers cited at the time - I remember a GamePro review bitching about it.

Oh i didn't realize we were back to how it feels is actually reality. Well, I feel you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult, and I feel no matter what facts anyone here gives you, you will keep moving goalposts.

 

[Kezen]

And it doesn't matter to Sony if a game is on PC as long as it's not on the Xbox One, it'd direct competition.

It's true in the case of SF 5.

 

[4Tran]

You're talking about opinions that people here have. Those don't seem to represent the market at large. No question Sony sold a lot of units, many of which due to MS's (numerous) mistakes, but I wouldn't say that was as nuanced as people making value assessments.

Nah, the people here care about what the actual differences in games would be based on the specs, about what exclusives each console has, and about online features and stuff like that. Casual gamers don't care about any of that. They're interested in what's perceived to be the better console, and how much cheaper the lesser console must be to be worth considering. Most of them will only end up buying a single console, so they're going to gravitate towards the better one. Do you think they care why the PS4 is better? Absolutely not - it's enough for them to know that they're getting the most for their money.

That can't happen. The Xbox is basically a Windows device now. Who would buy the console when they had no control over its OS? Since the OS is so tightly integrated with the hardware that would mean they had little control over the hardware too. Other than their gaming studios, there is nothing for MS to sell.

The Xbone isn't a Windows device by any stretch of the imagination. Even if it were, any contract would entitle the Xbox division buyer to guarantees of support from Microsoft. The Xbone's successor would have a new OS and new APIs, so any Windows integration becomes a moot point. If Microsoft leaves the market, you can bet that they're going to try to make Xbox as attractive as possible for any prospective buyer.

 

[therealbigrich]

Based on MS pass I do feel like x1 could hit 50 million some how and ps4 like hitting around 80 million. The one problem I see is they will likely be coming out with new systems shortly after that time

 

[cakely]

Lava Lamp the becomes fastest selling game console of 2013!

This must be one of those absurd non-sequiturs the kids love so much these days.

 

[enMTW]

Yeah but it's a problem you repeating. You talk about graphics during Gen 6, then when people bring up PS2 games that are graphically comparable you move the goal post and talk about stuff like DLC, matchmaking and voice chat.

You are suspicious of Amazon chart tracking being a reliable predictor of sales claiming a broken clock is right twice a day even though it was pointed out to you that the Amazon charts have correctly predicted console sales 14 months in a row. You move the goal post by claiming a general distrust by how they come by their numbers.

You say there is a bigger power gap between the Xbox 360 and PS3 than the PS4 and Xbox One. People told all the reasons you were wrong. You claimed the Xbox 360 had half the RAM - it doesn't (it has the same as PS3). You claimed multiplatform games were the best way to judge power difference and used the first half of last generation to prove the Xbox 360, yet people rebuked that claim by showing the last half has shown parity and the big difference between PS3 exclusives and Xbox 360 exclusives - you compared a 2009 game (Killzone 2) with a 2013 game (Halo 4). People explained that the CELL processor and general architecture of the PS3 is why multiplatform games performed worse for years on the PS3 and that after developers understood how to code for it that the PS3 was arguably slightly more powerful.

People listed the specs, granular specs, of each console and how the PS4 is more powerful in (I believe) every stat. People listed games that had a clear resolution difference almost always favoring the PS4, and you say it looks the same to you.

Dude, it's easy to see what you are doing. Simply put, you are doing a really poor job of hiding your obvious biases.

I'm on my phone or I'd take the time to actually quote the countless instances of lying or goalpost moving.

There are no PS2 games that have comparable graphics. This is because the PS2 is many times weaker.

A poster came in and explained what's going on with those charts and it is as I expected.

That is an insane argument. The split ram problem (and the weaker GPU) lead to worse ports for the entire gen. You could extract lots out of CELL, but it didn't happen outside of first parties. That isn't a good trade IMO.

That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about the difference between substantial (Xbox versus PS2) and not (icing on the cake - higher resolution assets, better skybox, etc). At no point did I deny that the PS4 is more powerful, or that higher resolution beats lower resolution.

Substantial equals games that would not be possible without the difference. We haven't seen anything like that on the PS4 yet.

Oh i didn't realize we were back to how it feels is actually reality. Well, I feel you're being difficult for the sake of being difficult, and I feel no matter what facts anyone here gives you, you will keep moving goalposts.

The goal post remains the same. You are making this very difficult! I stated the same thing fifty times yet you continue to deny it. I hold these truths to be self evident: that games that are more difficult to play on a controller were not designed around a controller, that text input is an important part of an MMO and plugging in a USB keyboard isn't a solution, etc etc etc.

If you feel that the inability to chat, the inability to quickly switch spells, the inability to etc is representative of a game developed for the console in mind, go play War Thunder on PS4 and talk to me about how the monitor-sized default fonts are perfectly normal or something.

 

[WarWolf]

This is hard, as it has been so long since I've played the game, but I found it hard to select different, err.. abilities (i think?) with the controller. That worked better on the PC.

It was friendly, but it wasn't 'phantasy star' friendly. It was clearly harder to play on a controller than it was with a PC (IN MY OPINION)

Yeah, but some people actually do prefer to play the game with controller. The game was CLEARLY designed to be played that way.

Abilities were all best used with macros. PC using function keys, console using shoulder buttons and selecting.

Just because this game doesn't adhere to your arbitrary list doesn't make it not forward thinking. The next gen 360 ported it after all.

 

[truth411]

Yeah but it's a problem you repeating. You talk about graphics during Gen 6, then when people bring up PS2 games that are graphically comparable you move the goal post and talk about stuff like DLC, matchmaking and voice chat.

You are suspicious of Amazon chart tracking being a reliable predictor of sales claiming a broken clock is right twice a day even though it was pointed out to you that the Amazon charts have correctly predicted console sales 14 months in a row. You move the goal post by claiming a general distrust by how they come by their numbers.

You say there is a bigger power gap between the Xbox 360 and PS3 than the PS4 and Xbox One. People told all the reasons you were wrong. You claimed the Xbox 360 had half the RAM - it doesn't (it has the same as PS3). You claimed multiplatform games were the best way to judge power difference and used the first half of last generation to prove the Xbox 360, yet people rebuked that claim by showing the last half has shown parity and the big difference between PS3 exclusives and Xbox 360 exclusives - you compared a 2009 game (Killzone 2) with a 2013 game (Halo 4). People explained that the CELL processor and general architecture of the PS3 is why multiplatform games performed worse for years on the PS3 and that after developers understood how to code for it that the PS3 was arguably slightly more powerful.

People listed the specs, granular specs, of each console and how the PS4 is more powerful in (I believe) every stat. People listed games that had a clear resolution difference almost always favoring the PS4, and you say it looks the same to you.

Dude, it's easy to see what you are doing. Simply put, you are doing a really poor job of hiding your obvious biases.

I'm on my phone or I'd take the time to actually quote the countless instances of lying or goalpost moving.

And we're done here

 

[Dragonborn]

There are no PS2 games that have comparable graphics. This is because the PS2 is many times weaker.

A poster came in and explained what's going on with those charts and it is as I expected.

That is an insane argument. The split ram problem (and the weaker GPU) lead to worse ports for the entire gen. You could extract lots out of CELL, but it didn't happen outside of first parties. That isn't a good trade IMO.

That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about the difference between substantial (Xbox versus PS2) and not (icing on the cake - higher resolution assets, better skybox, etc)

Substantial equals games that would not be possible without the difference. We haven't seen anything like that on the PS4 yet.

The PS2 release over a year before the other two. Why would you expect it to be more powerful. It's a known fact that the PS2 was pretty much weaker than the Xbox and GameCube

 

[enMTW]

Yeah, but some people actually do prefer to play the game with controller. The game was CLEARLY designed to be played that way.

Abilities were all best used with macros. PC using function keys, console using shoulder buttons and selecting.

It clearly wasn't! 1 button on the PC. PS2, a menu system. Like Oblivion. The Xbox port exists as part of a deal MS made with SE to get Final Fantasy games on the 360. It's an odd duck, operating outside of Xbox Live.

You can prefer obtuse UI, if you want, but it doesn't make it the lead SKU.

 

[Steroyd]

I don't remember MGS2's port looking worse. I do remember a port with lots of technical issues (and missing content), but they weren't the Xboxes fault. The Xbox is a generation beyond the PS2 - it's not even close.

I don't understand why this is in contention now. Does someone have a chart giving percentages to the power difference?

MGS2 was straight up missing graphical effects from my recollection and the rain murdered performance.

I won't argue that the Xbox is a better console, but calling it a generational leap is a bit much.

 

[enMTW]

MGS2 was straight up missing graphical effects from my recollection and the rain murdered performance.

I won't argue that the Xbox is a better console, but calling it a generational leap is a bit much.

Ah. Didn't remember. I only played through it on Xbox once. The perils of fast moving replies.

Clearly a situation where the developer didn't know what they were doing.

To me, a generational difference is night-and-day graphics (graphics any joe in a store can see are better) and things that would not be possible elsewhere (Xbox Live, Halo 2)

I honestly think it's fair. DLC, Title Updates, Matchmaking, Voice chat, hard drive caching. That's not a 360/PS3 or One/PS4 gap, that's a chasm you could shove whole planets in between.

 

[Kezen]

Ah. Didn't remember. I only played through it on Xbox once. The perils of fast moving replies.

Clearly a situation where the developer didn't know what they were doing.

To me, a generational difference is night-and-day graphics (graphics any joe in a store can see are better) and things that would not be possible elsewhere (Xbox Live, Halo 2)

I honestly think it's fair. DLC, Title Updates, Matchmaking, Voice chat, hard drive caching. That's not a 360/PS3 or One/PS4 gap, that's a chasm you could shove whole planets in between.

And what do you think about the current PS4 vs Xbox One gap ?

 

[enMTW]

And what do you think about the current PS4 vs Xbox One gap ?

There is a gap. It is large. It is not as large as the PS2/Xbox gap. I wouldn't quantify it as generational, but you will get some impressive first party games for the PS4.

You guys understand that I own all the systems, right? I'm not fanboying a brand here.

 

[atomico]

I don't remember MGS2's port looking worse. I do remember a port with lots of technical issues (and missing content), but they weren't the Xboxes fault.

FWIW, I don't recall any missing content (other than the skate mini game) or graphical downgrade on the Xbox version of Substance. I do remember the rain outside of the tanker knocking the framerate down to like 10-20fps, though.

 

[enMTW]

FWIW, I don't recall any missing content (other than the skate mini game) or graphical downgrade on the Xbox version of Substance. I do remember the rain outside of the tanker knocking the framerate down to like 10-20fps, though.

The skate game was what I was referring to. I rented it thinking that it was included and was quite disappointed.

 

[Bastables]

Yeah but it's a problem you repeating. You talk about graphics during Gen 6, then when people bring up PS2 games that are graphically comparable you move the goal post and talk about stuff like DLC, matchmaking and voice chat.

You are suspicious of Amazon chart tracking being a reliable predictor of sales claiming a broken clock is right twice a day even though it was pointed out to you that the Amazon charts have correctly predicted console sales 14 months in a row. You move the goal post by claiming a general distrust by how they come by their numbers.

I really like the whole broken clock is correct twice a day, applied to a clock that has been selecting the correct hr 24 times a day. In the metaphor hellscape he's built with his basis he's attacking a "working clock" because there is a cultural understanding that there are also broken clocks. . . .

I think i'm actually stupider now for having read and thought about it.

 

[Elandyll]

At the rate you are going you will never last long enough for our bet to even be relevant man...

 

[TheDangerMan]

It clearly wasn't! 1 button on the PC. PS2, a menu system. Like Oblivion. The Xbox port exists as part of a deal MS made with SE to get Final Fantasy games on the 360. It's an odd duck, operating outside of Xbox Live.

You can prefer obtuse UI, if you want, but it doesn't make it the lead SKU.

Alright... I don't know how this thread ended up about FFXI, but you seriously need to stop talking about it since you clearly either don't remember it or didn't play it. That's not how FFXI worked on PC. The hotkeys were basic and brought up the exact same menus that pressing a button on PS2 did.

There was no "press J to cast Utsusemi: Ni" option. You created a macro (/cast "Utsusemi: Ni, /say "Casting Utsusemi:Ni", /wait 1, /recharge) that you then bound to 1 through 0 on the keyboard and then pressed it to set off the sequence of events in your macro.You did THE EXACT SAME THING on the controller, and bound it to L2/R2 in a mimic of 1-0 on the keyboard. At MOST it took an extra .3 seconds to use a controller, and as someone who tanked endgame using one I'd debate it did even that for me.

NO ONE on PC pressed the button to bring up the abilites menu, went to spells, and manually selected the one they wanted to cast. If they did, they never made it past level 18. It just wasn't feasible, you would be useless. It was ALL macros, for both platform.

This is so far off topic its crazy, but I can't let you slander a game I truly loved with no idea what you are talking about.

 

[enMTW]

I really like the whole broken clock is correct twice a day, applied to a clock that has been selecting the correct hr 24 times a day. In the metaphor hellscape he's built with his basis he's attacking a "working clock" because there is a cultural understanding that there are also broken clocks. . . .

I think i'm actually stupider now for having read and thought about it.

Video games aren't the only things in the world. I can point to the lava lamps or a lineup of 5 chromebooks being the most popular PCs on Amazon for months on end (despite this not even coming close to the market at large)

Someone came in here and explained the way Amazon charts work. It's problematic, to say the least. The charts don't reset monthly - they just keep on going, leading to non-representative situations.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Video games aren't the only things in the world. I can point to the lava lamps or a lineup of 5 chromebooks being the most popular PCs on Amazon for months on end (despite this not even coming close to the market at large)

Someone came in here and explained the way Amazon charts work. It's problematic, to say the least. The charts don't reset monthly - they just keep on going, leading to non-representative situations.

What is going on in this thread? How did we go from sales of consoles to making weird references to Chromebooks and lava lamps?

 

[WarWolf]

It clearly wasn't! 1 button on the PC. PS2, a menu system. Like Oblivion. The Xbox port exists as part of a deal MS made with SE to get Final Fantasy games on the 360. It's an odd duck, operating outside of Xbox Live.

You can prefer obtuse UI, if you want, but it doesn't make it the lead SKU.

It's not really one button press on PC though. shift of alt + function key as well as changing through macro sets. I don't think you really played the game as you don't know really much at all how it works/worked.

Guess I'm done responding to you though. You've derailed this thread about predictions into how the first Xbox 1 was a generation ahead of PS2. (It wasn't)

 

[enMTW]

Alright... I don't know how this thread ended up about FFXI, but you seriously need to stop talking about it since you clearly either don't remember it or didn't play it. That's not how FFXI worked on PC. The hotkeys were basic and brought up the exact same menus that pressing a button on PS2 did.

There was no "press J to casts Utsusemi: Ni" option. You created a macro (/cast "Utsusemi: Ni, /say "Casting Utsusemi:Ni, /wait 1, /recharge) that you then bound to 1 through 0 on the keyboard and then pressed it to set off the sequence of events in your macro.You did THE EXACT SAME THING on the controller, and bound it to L2/R2 in a mimic of 1-0 on the keyboard. At MOST it took an extra .3 seconds to use a controller, and as someone who tanked endgame using one I'd debate it did even that for me.

NO ONE on PC pressed the button to bring up the abilites menu, went to spells, and manually selected the one they wanted to cast. If they did, they never made it past level 18. It just wasn't feasible, you would be useless. It was ALL macros, for both platform.

This is so far off topic its crazy, but I can't let you slander a game I truly loved with no idea what you are talking about.

Am I seriously going to have to reinstall the game to win this argument? Pay for a month of time? You could set the game up so you could push, say, f2 and have a thing happen. That wasn't viable (if even possible - apparently it is - it's been well over a decade so what do I know) on the PS2.

I like that you admit I was right, though. You can bind things to keyboard buttons, you push them and it's faster. You are just arguing over how much faster it was.

 

[bwakh]

That's weighting. Someone came in here and explained how Amazon does charts. They are, as I thought, absolutely bizarre. The charts should start for nothing, with no weights, every hour. Then you publish the list of 'winners' every 24 hours.

Exactly.

Nah, a daily chart would be too small a time frame. But discussing that would be derailing the thread so let's leave that

 

[enMTW]

Exactly.

Nah, a daily chart would be too small a time frame. But discussing that would be derailing the thread so let's leave that

I'd like to see weekly, monthly, etc charts. Leaving them up forever is not representative of how the system is doing at the moment, this month (aka the metric that matters)

What is going on in this thread? How did we go from sales of consoles to making weird references to Chromebooks and lava lamps?

It's a long story.

Guess I'm done responding to you though. You've derailed this thread about predictions into how the first Xbox 1 was a generation ahead of PS2. (It wasn't)

(it was)

 

[ForsakenLotus]

There are no PS2 games that have comparable graphics. This is because the PS2 is many times weaker.

A poster came in and explained what's going on with those charts and it is as I expected.

That is an insane argument. The split ram problem (and the weaker GPU) lead to worse ports for the entire gen. You could extract lots out of CELL, but it didn't happen outside of first parties. That isn't a good trade IMO.

That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about the difference between substantial (Xbox versus PS2) and not (icing on the cake - higher resolution assets, better skybox, etc). At no point did I deny that the PS4 is more powerful, or that higher resolution beats lower resolution.

Substantial equals games that would not be possible without the difference. We haven't seen anything like that on the PS4 yet.



The goal post remains the same. You are making this very difficult! I stated the same thing fifty times yet you continue to deny it. If you feel that the inability to chat, the inability to quickly switch spells, the inability to is representative of a game developed for the console in mind, go play War Thunder on PS4 and talk to me about how the monitor-sized default fonts are perfectly normal or something.

The PS2 is weaker than the Xbox and GameCube. I don't deny it. In fact I do think it's fairly substantial. But there are games that are graphically comparable and people pointed then out to you. Your response was either to say you meant a total package such as Halo 2 having matchmaking, DLC, voice chat, etc. instead of a graphics debate, you turn it into something else entirely. Or, you simply dismissed the game saying it wasn't to your liking.

As for the CELL, it is irrelevant if it was a good or bad trade off. You said the Xbox 360 was SUBSTANTIALLY more powerful. People pointed out games like Uncharted 2/3, The Last of Us and Beyond Two Souls as something graphically ahead of anything seen on the Xbox 360 and maye not possible on the 360. Then you mention multiplatform games, which are a terrible way to judge power last gen because the PS3 was so much more complicated, yet in the last few years most games were more or less even with some multiplatform games being better on the Xbox 360 (Bayonetta and Skyrim) versus PS3 (Final Fantasy XIII and GTAV). I legitmitely don't know which console is more powerful, but clearly they are pretty close. But there is nothing even approximating a significant power gap, certainly not by how you judged gen 6.

And you say susbantial difference is a game that can't work on another platform, but you only use that when it benefits you. A game like that is present during last generation, unless you count something like The Last of Us for the PS3.

This generation there are huge resolution differences in many multiplatform games, plus do you think The Order 1886 looks like a game possible on the Xbox One given the games it's unable to run on par with the PS4 that aren't especially taxing?

Are you dizzy from talking in circles so much?

 

[GobFather]

Well said Kazuo Hirai...How many Sony's employees are among Gafs?

whhhhat? how do you come to that conclusion based on simply stating that I think they're going to make a lot of money from PSN plus... the same way Live does.. and Amiibo does for Nintendo. Remove your tin foil hat

 

[ForsakenLotus]

Also enMTW, you talk about how problematic the way Amazon does their chart tracking yet you seem to not care how accurate it has been.

In 14 months, Amazon has correctly predicted the sales of consoles. 14 straight. Obviously their formula is working. You simply cannot dispute it.

Yet somehow you do...

 

[Bastables]

Video games aren't the only things in the world. I can point to the lava lamps or a lineup of 5 chromebooks being the most popular PCs on Amazon for months on end (despite this not even coming close to the market at large)

Someone came in here and explained the way Amazon charts work. It's problematic, to say the least. The charts don't reset monthly - they just keep on going, leading to non-representative situations.

Dude we're talking about "video games" on video game forum, where amazon sales charts have correctly predicted the monthly sales leader for video game consoles every month.

I could care less in your fantastical examinations of lava lamps or the price of fish in java, it's irrelevant and really seems to be purposely factious.

You can find the concept problematic all you want you'd still be disingenuous and wrong as stating PS2 is all JPRG and racing. At this point you're not a "broken" clock but a clock that is slow and manages to never get the correct hr even twice a day.

 

[enMTW]

As for the CELL, it is irrelevant if it was a good or bad trade off. You said the Xbox 360 was SUBSTANTIALLY more powerful. People pointed out games like Uncharted 2/3, The Last of Us and Beyond Two Souls as something graphically ahead of anything seen on the Xbox 360 and maye not possible on the 360. Then you mention multiplatform games, which are a terrible way to judge power last gen because the PS3 was so much more complicated, yet in the last few years most games were more or less even with some multiplatform games being better on the Xbox 360 (Bayonetta and Skyrim) versus PS3 (Final Fantasy XIII and GTAV). I legitmitely don't know which console is more powerful, but clearly they are pretty close. But there is nothing even approximating a significant power gap, certainly not by how you judged gen 6.

And you say susbantial difference is a game that can't work on another platform, but you only use that when it benefits you. A game like that is present during last generation, unless you count something like The Last of Us for the PS3.

This generation there are huge resolution differences in many multiplatform games, plus do you think The Order 1886 looks like a game possible on the Xbox One given the games it's unable to run on par with the PS4 that aren't especially taxing?

The GPU being faster and the ram arrangement on the 360 resulted in a situation where more power was available without working for it. That was the only thing I was ever saying.

You're putting me in a position where I have to say if or if not a game could exist on the 360, and I'm not comfortable making that call for other developers.

 

[enMTW]

Dude we're talking about "video games" on video game forum, where amazon sales charts have correctly predicted the monthly sales leader for video game consoles every month.

Amazon's weighting system may be working for predicting console sales but it is not a reliable way to do so, as they assign weights and don't reset it monthly. The PS4 is banking points from launch whereas MS is higher than they should be as they sold a lot of units during the holidays.

It's a horseshit chart that means nothing. Multiple people have come in here to agree or to expand upon what I said.

 

[Steroyd]

To me, a generational difference is night-and-day graphics (graphics any joe in a store can see are better) and things that would not be possible elsewhere (Xbox Live, Halo 2)

I honestly think it's fair. DLC, Title Updates, Matchmaking, Voice chat, hard drive caching. That's not a 360/PS3 or One/PS4 gap, that's a chasm you could shove whole planets in between.

The only difference I see is a hard drive, if we're really going to use your logic then I go back to DVD versus Gamecube minidisc and GTA and call PS2 a generational leap over GC. PS1 and N64 weren't in the same generation either following the same line of thought, it's slippery thought process when we bring hardware into this.

Also any joe would probably have a harder time distinguishing Splinter Cell PS2 with Splinter Cell Xbox compared to say FFIX to FFX.

 

[jhmtehgamr20xx]

.

 

[Neuromancer]

GAF Analytics report: Lava Lamps to outsell Chromebooks by 40% through 2015

 

[bobeth]

The power difference between the two consoles is somewhat substantial, but exclusives on both will look stellar. MS has an opportunity to stay competitive, if they can consistently keep the price of their box a hundred dollars less than that of the PS4.

 

[i-Lo]

So, what's going on here?

Anyway, even if there was to be that much of a gap, the individual install bases of each console would be substantial enough to forgo making TP exclusives for unless compensatory deals are made with Sony (or MS).

I am unaware as to how much console performance matter to general consumers who aren't part of any gaming forum and gravitate toward specific franchises and only buy a select few titles in the course of a single year.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

The GPU and the ram arraignment on the 360 resulted in a situation where more power was available without working for it.

You're putting me in a position where I have to say if or if not a game could exist on the 360, and I'm not comfortable making that call for other developers.

You have to be consistent. If you are capable of proclaiming games on the Xbox weren't possible on the PS2, which by your obtuse definition is a significant power gap, then why can't you do the same for last gen?

Also, you keep bringing up the fact that it was easier to develop for the Xbox 360, but that doesn't mean it was more powerful. By that account the console that is easiest to code for is the mos powerful. That's an illogical way to view it.

You've seen he mathematical differences between the PS4 and Xbox One. You seen the multiplatform difference between the PS4 and Xbox One. It's been explained to you that the PS4 is easier to develop for, or at least it's a non issue.

Yet you claim there is a bigger gap between te Xbox 360 and PS3 than there is between the PS3 even though the most impressive looking games are clearly on the PS3, multiplatform games reach parity, and the numbers on both are very close.

I don't understand your position.

 

[enMTW]

The only difference I see is a hard drive, if we're really going to use your logic then I go back to DVD versus Gamecube minidisc and GTA and call PS2 a generational leap over GC. PS1 and N64 weren't in the same generation either following the same line of thought, it's slippery thought process when we bring hardware into this.

The system ran an honest-to-god OS, an updatable OS. That made Xbox Live possible, it made headsets possible, it made multiplayer in general possible [as you could release patches to fix exploits in a game, as no one likes cheaters[. A built in ethernet port meant it could (realistically) get an audience. A hard drive meant games could offer DLC.

It is no accident that the the things the Xbox offered were the things that defined the following generation. That is where I am coming from when I say 'a generational different'.

Why, oh why, is this what we are discussing in a thread about a report from Sam Analytics? Are my views that controversial?