Yeah I hope they release The Last of Us full HD with anisotropic filter and 4X AA. TLOU was awesome besides the blurry textures, I loved the DTS sound track, gave my Polk 75s an workout.
Nope but I can see Sony releasing PS3 games on the PS4 PSN in 1080P with AA in the near future after launch. I would like to see play GOW series in 1080P or better in the near future.
Tdjones68
Sony was wrong with the PS3, the PS2, and the PS1 regarding actually performance. I don't see them being any different with the PS4. 7 years from now you will probably see another spec downgrade when the PS5 is ready. Not heard one multiple platform developers come out and say the PS4 has an huge performance advantage, instead they say PS4 and XB1 are similar. Which is the whole point of my first post.
I don't see a huge difference besides ...
What? You know I'm going off Sony's PS3 press release specs compared to what people say it is now. This is only to show how Sony overhypes their products specs only to find out later its not nearly as powerful as Sony claims. Posted links below with the 1.8 GFLOPS claim on the GPU so yes I have done my research no need for silly comments. And yes based on the numbers Sony claims with the PS3 performance my statement is still true about the PS4 and XB1 being closer in performance than ...
We don't know both consoles final CPU specs yet. Only thing announced is 8 core CPU, every thing else are rumors just like the 7 GBs of ram available to developers when new rumors have it closer to 5-6 GBs. In terms of pure performance from what has been released 1.3 compared to 1.8 is not an huge gap.
A huge gap would be 1.3 compared to 5.2 TFLOPS or 4 times faster. Its not even 50 percent faster while the claimed PS3 specs is about 6 times the performance of the X360 an...
Really? What about the FMV Kill Zone 2 tech demo supposedly rendered in real time? Or Wipe Out FMV cut scenes being passed for real time gameplay on the PS1. Again I will like to see how they figured 2TFLOP for the PS3 when its GPU is slower than the desktop equivalent. If that was true the PS4 is in trouble if it can't outperform the PS3.
I doubt Sony would pull an Nintendo and release a product inferior or slightly superior to current gen consoles. That's why I cal...
I'm saying no. The X1 and PS4 are closer together than the PS3 and X360. X360 GPU almost twice as fast, while the PS3 CPU was three times thee performance of the X360. Final specs has not been released yet but in terms of performance difference is not even a third. Sony could be lying like they did with PS3 saying it has 2 TFLOPS performance which would make it more powerful than the PS4 going strictly off FLOPS.
I would still like to see how Sony figured out the PS3 TFL...
My PS3 controllers I'm lucky if I get 6 hrs out of them any more. Just like my phone PS3 controllers charge goes to hell after 3 years. I was probably getting 11-14 hrs when they were new, now in order to beat a 10 hr game I must have both controllers fully charged or otherwise play with the USB charge cable connected.
Agree, my PS3 controllers are probably getting around 6 hrs of gameplay after 3 years of moderate use. To beat the last of us I had to charge my PS3 controller or switch no less than 4 times. My X360 controllers I can play for weeks without changing batteries.
Nintendo needs to fire whoever is in charge of hardware R&D with their 2nd home console blunder.
That's what I'm saying, plus you can play most games in under 5 mins compared to waiting hours to download large digital games.
So if every body wants to go full digital which probably means the game is going to be tied to your ID why in the hell were people complaining about XB1 DRM? Keep physical, I like trading in my games once I'm done with it. On top of that the more games that fill your hard drive, the slower your system is going to perform if its mechanical. Maybe its just me not wanting to wait for a 50 GB game to download when I can pop the disc in play in less than 2 mins.
People didn't buy into because it was Sony ripping off Nintendo. It was like the developers had dual monitors with SMB up on one while creating PAS on the other.
Finally! My I7 970 has not much of an challenge as of late. I think Crysis 3 is the only game I've seen my CPU cores reach above 50 percent.
PS4 advantage in terms of raw computing performance I never saw as an big deal. Less than 50 percent is not really an huge advantage, X360 GPU was nearly double that of the PS3 and it showed in early game ports. On the other hand Cell had about 3 times the performance of X360 CPU, now thats substantial difference and it showed late in this generation cycle.
The biggest advantage for Sony is the GDDR 5 ram having nearly 3 times the bandwidth. The PS4 bandwidth will allow bette...
@HardcoreGamer21
I wouldn't say the PS4 is way more powerful than XB1. Its not even 50 percent, way more powerful would be 3-5 times the performance or the difference between X360 and the orginal Xbox. PS4 biggest advantage will be its pixel fill rate, something Sony has always had the advantage dating back to the PS2 vs Xbox. The ram seem about even with 5-6 GB being used for games by both systems. The bandwidth will allow greater pixel shader anti aliasing performance f...
Yeah 100 MHZ is a small bump but if you can squeeze 4-5 FPS I would take that any day of the week. I would rather play a game at a solid 30 FPS than 24-26 FPS so the small bump makes sense to me. What I'm laughing at is the magical numbers people seem to make up and pass their comments off as being facts. I'm seeing any where from 50 MHZ to 200 MHZ increase in GPU clock rates, and a additional 2-4 GBs of ram for XB1.
Well I guess PS4 fanboys did the same thing with th...
Think about it, if you don't have physical disc how can you trade in your titles ounce your done with them? Besides I'm not trying to wait for an 50GB game to download on 18mbps connection any time soon. Max Payne 3 on the PC took over night at 31 GBs, I couldn't imagine doing this for every game I buy. I rather just pop the disc and play, when I'm done pop the disc out, back in the corner.
Can the consumers get the difference in game prices, lets say $55 instead of $60
Is it me or are graphics too damn expensive? Bring back the days when top of the line graphics cards cost $300 rather than $600 plus. My personal limit for graphics cards is $400, never paid more than that, don't see the value in return with anything higher.