because consoletards are too poor to afford more powerful hardware. (see PS3 vs Xbox360) Imagine if Sony announced PS4 for 999$ with actually good hardware. how many kids' parents would buy this on Christmas?
I wouldn't mind them being underpowered if there were actually any decent games to play on them. Power does not equal best in console gaming, it never has been and this has always been a hollow argument. PS2 has probably the best game library of any console ever made and yet was not the most powerful console of its gen. Its one of the reasons I still have a slight amount of respect for Nintendo because they just flat out refuse to play that game.
I seriously cannot believe how few fun looking games there are on any of the current gen consoles.
>>288356527 Saturation and price range. If you made a console that could realistically compete with a high-end computer, it would easily be around the $600~$1000 price range. No one's going to buy that when the competition's selling for literally a quarter of the price
Nintendo has the right idea. Fuck hardware, fuck specs, focus on putting shit out in an affordable price range and justify it with software that prioritizes stylization over realism. Sony and MS still don't realize that no matter how they try, they're not going to beat PC.
Probably because nobody knows any better. They gradually lowered the framerate over the years to the unplayable 25-30fps mess that's now standard and people think that's what games are supposed to look like.
That's why you hear shit like "60fps looks too real"!
>>288356527 Because devs now realize how long its going to take to make games on that hardware.
The order took 5 years to develop and literally all we got was a tech demo with all the finiancial eggs put into visual muscle and they forgot to make a game.
This generation won't be great, the only thing we can hope for is that they take this muscle and utilize the fuck out of a good art style and make it a treat to look at, not a chore to run. Realist art styles are for some reason the graphical benchmark people just kind of expect now.
>>288357027 Their failure and what I described are two non-touching parts of the venn diagram.
Even their shit games manage to properly utilize stylization to mask the hardware's shortcomings. Look at games like Smash 4, Mario 3D, and MK8; even if you think they're shit games, they manage to pull off some impressive visual tricks.
Because consoles are supposed to be the cheap option compared to a mid-level gaming PC.
Considering the sweet spot for a pc build is around 1,000-1,500, consoles have to undercut that by half.
But you get what you pay for. Considering consoles are literally pc parts running a locked OS, it's budget parts in a stylized compact case. Otherwise they wouldnt be able to mass produce them at that price point.
As far as why consoles stopped getting bigger and badder, its because the biggest cpu manufacturers (amd/intel) have stopped directly competing in this category, so there havent been high-end parts becoming budget tier in the wake of an arms race.
Also, the big three consile manufacturers are no longer playing to consumers, and are now releasing consoles every couple of years because they're afraid one of the other companies is going to be the only one with a "new" one on the market.
>>288356527 Costs and cooling. Powerful hardware needs ventilation which makes boxes loud and huge, and powerful compact hardware is expensive. They had absolutely no way of making it both powerful,"small" and cheap. So they made it crap.
>>288356846 >developers will still prioritize graphics over framerate, because fancy graphics sell. Yeah, but sadly they prioritize the wrong type of graphics. They prioritize fidelity (texture resolution, poly count, etc) over aesthetics, and it is retarded.
Games like Maximo and Ratchet and Clank still look good to this day, despite being on the PS2 because their aesthetic allowed them to do more with the hardware.
Too many developers are just fucking incompetent nowadays, and don't actually have clue one on how to actually optimize their games.On the PC it is going to be a nightmare when Vulcan (OpenGL2) comes out and developers can no longer rely on card drivers to optimize their games for them.
>>288357330 >which makes boxes loud and huge I don't think normalfags even remotely consider this when buying hardware Smartphones, tablets, and laptops are pretty silent, why do you think they'd even imagine that computers or game consoles can be loud? They're never even loud in the movies
Sony and Microsoft figured out there is more money to be made in screwing people by selling them underpowered laptop components and charge for online, than in actually providing players a good product and an enjoyable experience.
>>288356527 >bro finally gets Bloodborne >i watch him play because i've played the rest of the souls series, i don't own a PS4 though >he can't beat the cleric beast, complains about not being used to the controls and that the fps dropping is causing trouble >i ask him to let me try >test the controls for a minute or so, then bumrush to the cleric beast >beat it in my first try, used no ammo and only 1 potion Felt pretty clunky, and the fps drops were really irritating to play with. I'd rather just continue playing DAS2 on PC, or better yet get the DX11 version when that's out.
>>288356527 many reason though the big reason would be:
-neither company could take a big hit on hardware due to their financial situations -foundries have had a hell of a time getting to nodes below 28nm, this is a huge constraint given that both consoles are APU designs -foundries shift from primarily servicing high performance designs to low power SOC designs -the cost Jaguar cores was so cheap that it pretty much pushed any other option off the table for CPUs cores -Xbone was hit hard by the fact DDR4 did not hit the market in time for adoption
Even if the console were released today they would still be under powered since 28nm is the only node available for high performance chips outside of Intel. Maybe the bone could of moved to DDR4, both console could of moved to Puma cores, and both would of got a memory bandwidth upgrade due to delta compression. For good performance the console would have to be released sometime in 2016 when TSMC or Global Foundries had their 16nm FF or 14nm FF nodes ready. Also in 2016 DDR4 or HBM will be ready, that would of solved the bandwidth issues. CPU performance would probably still suck because it is likely Puma or Puma+ would be used though.
>>288358889 >buying GPU new What's the fucking point. If you get a 290 for 120 bucks and shits itself two years down the line because someone tried to mine with it, it's still better than buying a 250X and having to replace it because it's too shit to manage PS2 resolution
>>288358435 eh, it would of been nice to have hardware that could easily do 1080p at a solid 60fps (or solid 30fps for high fidelity games) with decent AA and AF. I think both console have memory bandwidth issues, though they are starting to be ironed out with better APIs. Better CPUs would of also been nice, more so to alleviate long loading times (this is the reason why swapping the HDD on the PS4 for a SSD does not have a huge effect).
Basically, the consoles needed a low power solution to avoid the nuclear furnaces that were the 360 and ps3. This combined with Nvidia being salty and IBM basically being out of the game meant unless they sunk shitloads into more R&D it would have to be what AMD is offering.
Now AMD's APU chips are leagues ahead of anything intel make and with nvidia not playing ball the APUs are the smartest move for a SoC setup. What has hurt is sony and MS missed out on HBM - if that had been available then chances are we'd see the cpus clocked higher as HBM has lower power draw than GDDR5 (MS's mental DDR3 and esram is all kinds of crazy this day and age).
tl;dr media box to sit below the TV means silent operation in small form factor, hence the underpowered hardware.
>>288359225 Really? I've seen 720p 60hz monitorso chucked out in the street before now, maybe even some 1080p ones that no one wants because they're shit, I always find a use for my old screens, but a 1080p 60hz one isn't really that expensive, why not just pick up a cheap one?
>>288356673 It seems like MS and Sony may have banked on this. This is the first console from the two that cost less to make than what it sold for. By about 50 dollars if I remember right. With how much both talked about playing games using streaming and "the power of the cloud" and how cheap the systems were to make this had to be their strategy long term.
I've also heard some say that the amount it would cost to get a reasonable jump in performance would be too much because of diminishing returns but that sounds like bullshit considering these systems can't even get a consistent 30 on some average looking games.
>>288357105 To be fair they started development on that game before the ps4 was a thing and had no idea what the specs were going to be. Then they had to probably scramble to get it to work on that under powered shitbox
>>288360920 I doubt the Xbox division had much choice, especially given the rumors of Microsoft trying to sell the division or spin it off. The server infrastructure was already in place since the cloud is not just for gaming. As for the controller design, I am unsure how they spent 100 million on it. Could just be PR bullshit to get play in the news, I guess the spent a fair bit of effort on reducing wireless latency and did some custom silicon in the controller.
Even if Microsoft took a hit, what could of they done? I guess they could of used GDDR5 or swaped the Jaguar cores for Steamroller cores. I do not think could do much to beef up the GPU because the die is already huge as is (unless they used GDDR5 and removed ESRAM, then it would just be a PS4 equivalent). If they were willing to take a big hit they could of went with discrete CPU and GPU design, though when you figure out the Performance/$ it would of been hard to argue this path vs an APU design.
>>288356527 Production cost. Quick time to market. Yields. Thermal margin. Power consumption.
There are far more important metrics than ultimate performance to the companies creating the systems. The PS4's SoC draws 100w under heavy load, entire system draw peaks around 140w. For 8 Jaguar cores and 18 active GCN1.1 CU that power consumption is incredible.
>>288356527 For the same reason every console generation is underpowered. 1. The console needs to be cheap, so they use old hardware. 2. When the console finally is released, that old hardware is then ancient. 3. Two years after the release, the console hardware is so bad, that even a cell phone has a more powerful graphics processor.
>>288364094 This guy gets it. Also, when your eyes only need to process 30 pictures instead of 60 every second, it puts less strain on them and allows you to concentrate more on the game which is really necessary in a hard core game like this. I also love how they chose to keep the weapon count down. It allows you to get good at the available arsenal instead of having to switch between a high number of weapons and never master your skills at any of them.
>>288363546 Higher clocks would have helped, curious if AMD added more sleep states to Puma+. This might of made stand-by modes more efficient. It shows how constrained the design of this gens console were when a year and half latter the options for similar cores are only minimally better. Moving up to big Steamroller or Excavator cores is the only way to offer more performance.
Because this is the first generation where consoles essentially became just inferior PCs. Last gen at last had the CELL and 360 which was easier to develop for in comparison. Now both XBone and PS4 are just wannabe PCs. Nintendo is still doing their own thing as always.
>>288358808 well my roommate who has only played on the PS3 looked over my shoulder a few days ago and said "wow, that looks so smooth. Also those graphics look amazing." He was playing AC:Unity. I was playing Brotherhood. Unity should look way better than brotherhood.
So even people who play on consoles can agree that 60 fps looks smoother.
>>288357271 >Considering consoles are literally pc parts
no, no and no
You can't currently buy at retail the ps4 apu or the xbone one either, because those are custom design and amd can't sell them to the public. also good luck in finding a pc with a 8gb ddr5 shared ram pool
>>288366093 As part of their semi-custom business AMD will build an SoC using their own IP, and whatever IP the customer provides. Theres no point in building a Power or PPC based SoC. The idea that PPC/Power in general is superior to modern X86 implementations is something unique to this board.
IBM's crowning glory(more like swan song) the Power8 arch is completely embarrassed by a run of the mill Xeon server chip.
>>288366369 do you have some benchmarks, that can tell me how the amd jaguar cores behave in comparison to the xbox360 cpu, or even the cell? because that's the big question, and also the main thing people shitpost about, the fact that those core have the power of the old intel atom you could found in some shitty netbook according to the general consensus.
if they didn't opt for those cpu cores, do you think another choice could have been made, while at the same time remaining in a <150watt package?
Jaguar cores have higher IPC than K10 based Phenom chips, they perform better per clock. The only benches where the Kabini Athlon here falls behind are due to the fact that it has single channel memory, something the consoles aren't limited by. The only issue at all with them in the consoles is that they don't have enough thermal margin to clock higher. Comparing anything to a Power or PPC arch is more complicated since they're so less common, but some Ubisoft dev gave a presentation on parallel compute at GDC last year where they had some rendering figures that compared the various CPUs.
having 60fps means getting extra 30 frames per second to react. In 3d games where you have possiblity of turning camera around character. Have you ever noticed difference between 30 and 60? It's huge to me. Shit gets choppy as all hell.
Console players only care about one thing: graphics. They don't care about games being good, they care about having a game that looks good enough to justify dropping $400 on a dedicated gaming machine.
There's a lot of pressure from Sony to cut any corner necessary to get the game looking as good as possible. That's why we get games like The Order 1886 with its no gameplay all graphics approach, and Bloodborne's minute long load screens and 18fps stuttering.
>>288357004 >They gradually lowered the framerate over the years Except that's not true. The standard dropped from 60 to 30ish as soon as 3D consoles were released. Almost no PS1/N64 games were 60fps.
There is an entire generation of console gamers who don't play racing, fighting or COD (the only console games to hit 60) and genuinely think that 30 is the norm and 60 looks unnatural. These are the kind of people Sony is targeting with the PS4.
>>288369859 People played 1024x600 Call of Duty games for years. Developers used all sorts of whacky custom resolutions and upscaled them to 1280x720, sometimes without any AA at all. Consumers still ate it up. They can get away with native 1280x720 and a few passes of AA along with post process sharpening now. It looks marginally better, and they're upping poly counts along with using higher res textures. So long as there is a noticeable improvement over the last gen most people don't really care about the specifics.
If there is another console gen(I don't think there will be) they could offer true 1920x1080@60 fps and upscale it to 4k, and consumers would still eat it up and ask for seconds.
>>288370234 Jaguar cores aren't bargain bin, they're one of the best things that AMD has ever produced in their entire operating history. The issue is their clock speed in their implementation in the PS4 and Xbone. When you have an SoC everything has to have the same BEOL. That means you can't give the CPU a full high performance metal stack and let it clock higher at a given voltage. Everything in those chips is using the same GPU metal stack that is gear for 1.1v at the very most.
>>288370645 Oh I agree, the architecture shits all over bulldozer in design but is not as efficient as it needs to be in this specific case and it doesn't supply the performance we'd hope here. At the very least the consoles will be super cheap(relatively) once the sales slow and cheaper redesigns come out.
Because everyone is skint after the 7th gen killed gaming, and they can't afford to sell consoles either at 599 US dollars or at a loss (Even though the Xbone actually did both and was the same price as the launch PS3)
>>288370234 >bargain bin netbook chips sony and ms purchased from AMD
A lot of it probably comes down to console devs not being used to multithreading. PS3/360 had 3 relatively powerful cores and most games only used 1 of them. PS4/Xbone have 8 piss-weak cores. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of devs are taking the last-gen approach of using as few threads as possible and throwing everything on a single core, and that's why the framerate tanks to sub-20 whenever there's a few physics objects or particles on-screen.
>>288374443 I disagree, his views are remains pretty consistent from since before he was diagnosed. The only reason /v/ puts him up on a pedestal now is because he was one of the only rational personalities in favour of gamer gate.
For the PS4 to already be profitable for Sony on a per unit basis is pretty remarkable. The first redesign of the PS4 will be far more profitable, and use considerably less power. 8GB GDDR5 chips are in production, so a revised PS4 would only need half as many.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.