Feedbackula - Xbone Flip-Flop Fracas!
Microsoft has changed its mind on how the Xbox One will operate, but is it enough to change our users' minds on the console itself? Johnny has the answers.
"...I like to bathe in tomato sauce and pretend I'm a meatball"
By far the best comment - laughed my ass off.
egad! immortalized on feedbackula.
although why you would not have used my comment on the ironic nature of the internet being outraged over being required to use the internet then proceeding to go on the internet to make their anger over required internet heard i will never know.
Personally I'm disappointed with Microsoft's decision to get rid of all their new features. I would say the only one I had a serious problem with is the 24 hour check-in, but I think people would have gotten used to it. Not to mention that even though some of their "restrictions" were odd or unwanted there were also some pretty cool features too (sharing games with up to 10 friends, xbox live for households, etc). Even if all the features good or bad were unwanted they should have moved forward in my opinion. Because Microsoft dropped those features we now have to consoles that are pretty close to being exactly the same, there is really no HUGE difference between the Xbox One and the PS4 and that is what's disappointing for me. Also I feel that all you PS4/Sony hardcore fan boys/girls have absolutely no opinion, not because I don't want to hear it, but even if 90% of the planet thought Xbox One was better you'd still say it's crap... Everything has it's flaws and people make mistakes, but it's how we deal with it that's important and personally I think that fans are wrong on this one. NOTE: THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION SO DON'T FLIP OUT OR ANYTHING! Thanks.
What M$ fans don´t get, is that the "always online" and the new "once at the first time" are no options, they´re restriction, and that´s what it fuck us all
6:40 I wan't to see Johnny eat his hat after, he finds out that those E3 kits that Phil Spencer felt so good about were running nVidia + Intel and PS4 out of the box has 2x more power
looking at how gamers behave/react on the interwebs makes me think that in a few generations we'll be wonderfully retarded.
It never ceases to amaze me how upset people get over an entertainment device. I pre-ordered the Xbox One the day after E3. None of the "restrictions" applied to me. I'm still happy with my purchase. I have friends who pre-ordered the PS4. Do I hate them and think their stupid? No. Maybe they like the games and features Sony showed off. In the end, who really cares THAT much to insult someone. No matter what you choose to play your games on, whether it be your cell phone, Xbox One, PS4, PC, it doesn't matter. As long as you like games, you're a gamer. Your part of a group of people who share a hobby that is unlike any other and its quickly outpacing movies in terms of popularity. So start embracing the culture and love ALL systems and games. Its what brings us together, people....
It's interesting that some people think the next gen is going to be just like the PS3 vs. 360 with very little if any differences between multiplat games. While this will no doubt be true at launch and early on in the life cycle of both consoles, I don't expect this to hold true in the long run.
Why? There is at most a 10%
theoretical difference between current gen
hardware, which is further reduced in real world application due to the
PS3's difficult API/SDK. Most coders I know put the real world
advantage at somewhere around 3-5% for the PS3, depending on what it is
being called to do. Ultimately, the differences are negligible, and in
many cases multiplats ended up being better on the 360 due to the fact
it is so much easier to code for and wring out that last little bit of
However, the PS4 has a very real 50% GPU shader + 20% memory bandwidth advantage. Unlike with the current gen, both next gen systems use the exact same x86 architecture and their API's/SDKs are nearly identical as well. In other words, the differences we see in the next gen will be more noticeable than with the current gen. A more accurate analogy would be comparing the original Xbox to the PS2. Every multiplat game during that gen looked much better on the Xbox. The next gen is going to be similar after devs have a couple years getting used to coding on both consoles. By year 2 we will see the PS4 rendering scenes on 1st party exclusives that the One simply can't duplicate.
The only question is how long it will take for multiplats to start showing differences as well. The answer to that question may be just how much $$$ MS is willing to spend to make sure devs code down-spec to the One in order to minimize the very real differences in power between the 2 consoles. Barring that, we will see differences...guaranteed. When it came to the 360/PS3, devs didn't purposefully code down to the 360...it was simply that the PS3 is so much more complicated to code for. That isn't going to be a problem on the PS4.With all that said, graphics certainly aren't everything. And there are no doubt going to be some great exclusives on both consoles. I'm far more concerned about the small, *non-replaceable* hard-drive in the One and the required Kinect 2.0 which artificially bumps the buy price above where it should be given it's lower-end specs. Microsoft made a calculated gamble in reducing system specs because they want everyone to have a Kinect but knew they couldn't launch at the $600 price point that killed PS3 launch sales. We shall see if the gamble pays off.
No they don't ... they will sell plenty and so will Sony ... and I still don't care as well. By the way, clever of you to use a $ for the "S". Now I now I really don't care if that's as creative as you can get. $$$$$$$ONY ... yes it really works lol.
I am well aware they didn't do it for the gamers as I am well aware Sony doesn't do it for the gamers as well. If the situation were reversed you can bet your sweet ass Sony would've done exactly the same thing. It's called business. Check Sony's history if you really think they are in it for the gamer.
@SpazldNinjaDude why don't you what till the end of the episode to comment
@bobbetybob Ha! That would be awesome!
@Reuwsaat I might kill for a Feedbackula game starring all the same voices as are heard in the episodes.
@TaylorAP13 There's no reason MS couldn't implement both ideas in some form with the "flick of a switch". They already run a hybrid system with XBLA games for some and physical disks for others. DRM of the sort that MS was hoping to implement with the next gen has never been about stopping piracy, it's about eliminating game *ownership* and game *sharing*...and converting games into a SERVICE which can be charged for indefinitely rather than a GOOD which can only be charged once. The gaming community is pretty smart and saw through this quickly, which is why people "flipped out"...justifiably for the most part.
I'd like to see MS implement some of the ideas while keeping physical disk *ownership* intact...but for now they choose to play it off as an "all or nothing" proposition, which is utter BS.
Also, the next gen consoles are not exactly the same: the PS4 is verified to have 50% more powerful GPU shaders and 20% more memory bandwidth. That's a LOT more real world difference than the small 3-5% difference between the PS3/360, which was complicated by the PS3's weird API/SDK and strange cell architecture. The bottom line is that within a couple yrs the PS4 will have games that look a lot better than the 360. And the 360 will have the Kinect and all of its promised TV integration. I know what is more important to me in a gaming machine which is why I pre-ordered 2 PS4s...but you do have a choice in the next gen that offers up 2 significantly different approaches.
@janlappalainen that happened two millenias ago. Quote from 100B.C. "The mob follows Fortuna and cares for nothing but bread and games" - now truer than ever
Many gamers take their consumer rights seriously and like having control over the hardware they buy and bring into their households. Just because MS's proposed DRM/checkin restrictions wouldn't have affected you doesn't mean that millions of other gamers are somehow wrong to stand up for things that affect *them*. Gamers have every right to be angry at MS for trying to force-feed overly restrictive DRM policies down their throats.
Furthermore, the false dichotomy MS is offering is BS: there is no reason they couldn't offer some of the benefits of their proposed "sharing"/digital download model while simultaneously supporting full "Fair Use" and "1st sale doctrine" protection for the consumer. They could easily support both ecosystems by allowing those who choose to download and "go digital" to do so while also allowing others to buy/collect/trade/sell physical copies. Just as there is no logical reason a console that is *designed* to be online *must* be online to function, there is likewise no reason that a console which is *designed* to support a growing digital/sharing game library can't also support physical games that gamers "own". Instead, MS continues to play these issues off as if it has to be one or the other, which is ultimately disingenuous and speaks loudly to their long-term plans.
It's great you pre-ordered a One. However, many gamers justifiably consider MS's actions a slap in the face after being loyal "360 fans" for many years. MS "did the right thing" by reversing the horrible DRM idea...but ultimately gamers know that they are only back-pedaling to try to save their pre-order numbers from being embarrassing relative to PS4. Somehow, this isn't cutting it for a large swath of gamers all over the world.
I own (5) 360s, love the concept of the 360 top to bottom, and generally prefer multiplats on them over my PS3s. But, I won't be purchasing a One at launch. Instead, I pre-ordered (2) PS4s. Perhaps when MS offers a SKU without the Kinect for $399/$349 and allows gamers to upgrade the small internal 500GB hard-drive by replacing it with larger *internal* HDDs, then I'll pick one up.
In the meantime, I have a back-log of
360/PS3/Wii/PC games that's a mile high...and should be more than happy
playing those along with a few PS4 games for the next 2-3 years while I
see how things shake out with the One. If MS doesn't pull a reversal and try to slap DRM back on the One in some fashion, I'll probably pick one up eventually. No rush.
@grim0187 Jesus Is Love. Game on
@mjswooosh If ps3 had a difficultier api/sdk then any computer and that impacted performance why it wasnt considered in the gamers evaluation until after they saw that performance was similar in both consoles? Why it was said that PS3 would surpass the xbox 360 graphycally in a couple years?
And very similar API/SDK? Nvidia driver 320.49 is very similar to 320.28 and yet is 20% better in games like Dirt. Unless its the same APIs you cannot rule out differences.
Its called handsight bias, its easy to look at past situations, look what came wrong and then came to an explanation, and then now you are looking for the exact same factors in PS4 and Xbox One, disgarding all the other infinite numbers of aspects that might influence performance (software and OS, for example). Thats why these kind of analysis are NEVER really accurate in real life (theres a huge difference between theoterical accuracy and real accuracy).
Theres one reason why Xbox wouldnt be (if any, or not better) much worse than PS4 and its quite simple: Consoles graphics follow PC, and PC graphic cards suffered a really HUGE enhancment in the past couple of years, to reach the point where you can play almost real-life games (called hyper-realistic games), but because almost no one has these high-end performances the games always follow the trend and increase graphics only gradually. Performance is PLANNED and obviously both PS4 and Xbox One would have prepared to host these high-end games case they start appearing on the market. Otherwise they would be left behind by PC.
And dont expect hyper-realistic games to become a viable market in less than a couple years.
@puukusa I'm not sure he was really referring to anything having to do with the "bread and circuses" quote (depends on the translation... ;)), but I like your interpretation and agree 100%. If only people got this passionate about things that actually *matter*. Perhaps most people only get passionate about things they believe they can actually affect.... Then again, people in other countries seem to have less trouble standing up for their rights on the big issues...Americans, on the other hand, are very apathetic...unless you mess with their video game consoles... :)~
@mjswooosh The thing about that that's hilarious to me is these people were complaining about always being online on the internet. I mean....really? Its obvious most of those DRM checks did not affect the majority of gamers. They just don't want to be told what to do no matter what it is or what good it could bring. Those DRM checks are nessesary to move towards all digital and to keep game prices down. To keep developers getting the money they deserve for making the games we love. It IS going to happen, eventually. Sony and Microsoft and even Nintendo will eventually move to a system that requires to be connected online in some form. Microsoft just moved way too fast in implementing it. The console did not have to ALWAYS be online to function. It just needed 5 seconds or so at 3 in the morning to authenticate.
And yes, it DID require that for family sharing. Not to mention, developers could trust that every Xbox One owner had internet and they could invest a lot more into the cloud. Now that they don't know if every console owner is connected, they wont be as willing to invest.
I don't know what you mean by "loyal 360 fan." I own multiple consoles and always have. I go where the games are and the features are. Once the price gets cut for a PS4 and if they decide to not charge for internet again, I might get one.
DRM is not evil. Its not some horrible policy that gamers should back away from. Its to ensure that developers get paid for what they make and that they can use that money to make better games. Games cost millions of dollars to make now. People buying used games and undercutting the business is NOT helping.
"Hindsight bias" is irrelevant to this discussion.
Most coders who were working on PS3 SDKs for up to 2 yrs prior to the PS3s release already knew that it was going to be nearly impossible to master the PS3 for years to come. The fact that devs didn't get the hang of the PS3 for at least 5 yrs after launch was no surprise to anyone who was in the know. Sony's claims at the time to having more powerful hardware were true - but mostly marketing speak in terms of real world gaming performance. Anyone with any experience in the games biz knew we'd rarely if ever see the PS3 reach its potential. Devs are human and have limited time and brain cells to dedicate to learning new ways to code. The 360 used an existing API/SDK which streamlined and simplified the process of creating games, whereas the PS3 was the exact opposite...akin to coding in Swahili when your first language is English.
In contrast, most coders I've talked to about the PS4 say its a "beast" and "just as easy to code for as the One" due to its inherent hardware advantages and nearly identical API/SDK.
Being able to predict performance/rendering advantages for the PS3 vs. 360 was apples to oranges with predictable results for those who understood how difficult the PS3 would be to maximize. Predicting performance/rendering advantages for the PS4 vs.the One is apples to apples, no more difficult than predicting the difference between a Ti560 and GTX680...which is just about the exact same difference as exists between the One and PS4, actually... :)
There may be some fluctuations between platforms in terms of Direct X vs OpenGL implementations (which also favor PS4), but all in all we can say for 100% certainty that performance with identical hardware architectures scales gaming performance *predictably* every time. This is, by now, pretty much a science when it comes to PC gaming video cards. And the PS4 and One are essentially mini-Wintel gaming PCs with opportunities for devs to get "closer to the metal" than with actual PCs.
@grim0187lol @ Your "Rage
Against the Machine" crack. Not bad. My tastes run a bit more
mainstream in my music choices, however. ;) I understand where you are
coming from...and understand that many/most Americans simply want to
escape from the stresses of the real world when they game. However,
sometimes the issues of the "real world" intersect with the issues
surrounding the business side of the gaming hobby we love so much. And
in those instances there is every reason to be aware and stand up for
what is right. So, while I agree with you on the point of wanting to
enjoy games and "get away from it all"...I also have to say that apathy
is exactly the reason why this country is swirling the drain in a
variety of ways. I deal with a variety of stresses in my daily life as
well...but it's important to be aware of the forces and policies which
shape our country and the system within which we live, lest we wake up
one day with everything crumbling around us.
I applaud you for your service to the medical community...that by itself is worth a lot. I myself am in the middle or retraining on the side while working to head into the medical field. Perhaps caring about the bigger picture will someday dawn on you. Usually this happens for apathetic people when something hits them close to home...like, say, dealing with the fucked up health insurance system...or something else that slams your pocket book hard. Most of us skate through life until something big hits us and we realize its time to stand up for what's right...
@Magus_BR Adult ADD isn't attractive. If you can't read and respond to something that's a few paragraphs long then you have bigger problems.
@D1nePenn As noted in my earlier response, MS has demonstrated for a solid decade now that they have no intention of trying to do "all-digital" the right way like Steam does it. MS is no Valve, that much is clear. It really isn't all that complex from a consumer standpoint: make digital download games CHEAPER. There, problem solved. Compete on price and make sure your games are ALL available at the same price or less than a competing physical copy, whether it be new or used. If MS does that - as even Sony is beginning to do - then we will see some forward momentum with console gamers becoming more comfortable with digital gaming.
Still, the problem I still see not going away for consoles any time soon is many of us still love the "collectability" and "tactile feel" of actually *owning* something we buy, especially when it comes to games. This seems to be a different animal than music or movies, for whatever reason. The concept of "Ownership" is a big one...and MS/publishers need to work out those kinks big time.
@mjswooosh I think one thing to point out about mjswooosh argument is that he points to "high speed" internet numbers concerning the general population. I don't know the numbers, but I imagine the majority of consumers playing videogames in this era have internet access (please note, I said majority, there are obviously groups that are affected). However, Microsoft did, in fact, make it clear that "high speed" internet was not required for the 24hr check. Even a weak internet connection would be capable of authenticating. As ridiculous as the comment was, they "claimed" a tethered smartphone would be fast enough for the 24hr update.
Despite what you assume DRM is for, I think Steam is the most a propos example of how DRM can benefit the gaming community. Console gamers have always been opposed to anything PC like on consoles, so it's not surprising the general public reacted so vehemently to MS' proposition. However, disc based media is going the way the VHS and the 8-track (i.e. Netflix, iTunes, Steam, SoundCloud, and Spotify). The fact that the current Xbox Live and PSN allow you to just purchase digital copies of games is the beginning. MS had a cool concept of how people could still share games. MS' plan had flaws, and it needed fine tuning, but that is a future I still look forward to.
@mjswooosh Dont make an article or no one will read. Be synthetic.
@mjswooosh My god....well, it seems you believe very strongly in your issues. I for one am just buying what I want to buy to play games. I'm not out to save the world. Its just a damn video game console. People honestly don't care that much. You do. I applaud you for it. Go listen to some more Rage Against The Machine and raise your fist and all that. Great. I'll just sit in my recliner and enjoy my games. I deal with enough drama in real life (surgical tech for a living). I just want to game in peace with my console of choice.
1) Your statement that "always online checks" don't affect "most gamers" is silly...and manages to miss the point entirely. First, roughly 40% of the US population has ZERO access to high-speed internet. That's 10s of millions of people in this country alone - not to mention the rest of the world - who either can't afford monthly internet expense or don't want to pay for it who might otherwise like the opportunity to buy a game console to play without paying for a monthly/daily net check. It's pretty clear most of MS's top Veeps live in a bubble and have zero understanding of the world outside their existence. But I'm still shocked at how many people support such policies which don't benefit them one bit and in fact remove their consumer rights at the same time.
Second, the point of many gamers like myself opposing this sort of policy has everything to do with standing up for consumer rights to have some control over ownership of the things we buy. The concept of "ownership" is very basic Econ 101 stuff and no amount of non-binding EULAs will stand up to "Fair Use" and "1st Sale Doctrine" in a court of law.
2) MS's plans for
"online sharing" does in no way "require" they implement an
all-or-nothing approach. They already implement a hybrid approach using
XBLA games coupled with physical games. Surely you can't be so obtuse in
your support for MS's policies to deny that it would take little more
than a flick of a switch for MS to allow both ideas to co-exist in some
3) DRM has never been about stopping
piracy. It is about stopping SHARING and USED GAMES. Recently this has
developed primarily because a couple large, influential, mis-managed,
bloated, over-budget AAA publishers have somehow gotten it in their
heads its a good idea to blame convenient scape-goats for their
cost-revenue gaps rather than look in the mirror at the real culprits.
Publishers who are nimble, well-managed, and produce games on smaller
budgets will be the only publishers left standing in another few years.
But, these AAA studios are going to try to blame used games by God and
go down swinging. lol
4) What don't you
understand about the concept that publishers make money off the FIRST
SALE and don't have any moral or legal right to make money off the
second-hand market as well?
5) Used markets exist for every good known to mankind for a reason: first, because some people prefer to sell what they purchased to recoup some of the original purchase price, perhaps to purchase something else (this is PROVEN statistically to be the source of funds for MANY new game purchases - when someone sells or trades in a recently purchased game, they buy another new game)...and second, because other people like to find a "good deal" and/or can't afford the price of the new good.
This applies whether we are talking about used cars, used books, used furniture, used anything. You don't see used car or book manufacturers bitching about used sales as "unfair competition" and demanding that we give them a cut of used sale profits or eliminate used sales altogether, do you? That would be unacceptable in any other market, yet people like yourself love to be apologists for the software industry and somehow defend their asinine idea that the same rules don't apply to them as to other markets.
6) Buyers/owners/sellers have long been protected by "1st sale doctrine" precedent which backs up what I just stated with the force of law. Fact.
7) If you believe MS is going to use DRM to "drive down" game prices, I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you. MS has had every opportunity to prove they know how to operate a digital distribution service the right way a la Steam, but have so far proven too thick-headed to understand that if given a choice gamers will OF COURSE choose the cheaper physical copies (new or used) vs. a more expensive digital copy of a game. This is a no-brainer but it somehow seems above MS's pay-grade. Meanwhile, Steam just continues to get it right by offering constant sales and has pretty much single handedly revived PC gaming. If I had any faith whatsoever that MS would do something similar with XBLA game prices/sales, then I might agree with you their all-digital plans have some potential. But, it's pretty clear after 9 or 10 years at this point they don't have any intention of changing their business model online. They just don't get it...and rather than compete on service/price as Steam does, they were trying to eliminate the compeition of used games entirely, which is contrary to everything business in this country is supposed to stand for.
What's especially funny to me after listening to people like yourself is you sound an awful lot like communists in that you want to eliminate the free market competition at work, artificially prop up dying/flailing publishers rather than let them die, and seem to have no problem eliminating the concept of ownership and private property, both of which are cornerstones to the free market capitalist system which has made this country thrive.Anywho, it's very clear that whatever MS's intentions are, consumers are *most definitely* not ready for it, even if you've personally drunk down gallons of kool-aid. I'd say the world-wide backlash is evidence enough of that. But, you keep believing that consumers can be "forced" to buy things they don't want to buy and we'll see how that goes in 5 or 10 years, mmm-kay? lol For now, physical disk copies are here to stay. And that's a victory for all gamers.
@mjswooosh @Magus_BR That last article you gave i found interesting. But if its true its really just stupid because contrary to hardware you can always update and develop your software after release (like they did on xbox 360).
Even then i will wait for the after-launch reviews before buying any console. Take care!
PS4 = 1.8 teraflop core. One = 1.2 teraflop core. This is the exact difference between the Ti560 and GTX660 (after reading your response I realized I committed a typo error...the PS4 is most certainly not as powerful as the 680). In real world performance, the jump from the top end Ti560 "phantom" (~1.2 gFLOPS) to the GTX660 (~1.8 gFLOPS) is significant. Although most of my PC rigs are ATI powered, I do happen to own some nVIDIA cards as well (yes, I collect video cards for some reason...still have a couple old Voodoo FX cards...RIP 3dfx...lol). I own both the 560 and the 660 (I love the mid-range cards) and I can tell you from personal experience the difference between the 2 is huge in every game.
I know a few devs personally...some of whom
are working on one or both consoles. Although many of them are under
NDAs officially, off the record I've had a beer with a couple of them
who have verified to me the PS4 is indeed superior in
terms of raw GPU/bandwidth horsepower. And really, given that we have
official specs which have been leaked and verified, anyone can do a
little simple math and extrapolate what
the real world performance differences are going to be because, well,
the ARCHITECTURES ARE IDENTICAL. Again, when architectures are the same,
scaling is pretty much an exact science that is well established by
years of video card benchmarks. And it is easier than ever for devs to
take advantage of extra horsepower of a more powerful card/console
because the bells and whistles, so to speak, are contained within the
SDKs...and truly involves nothing more complicated than "flipping a
switch" to ramp up rez, AA, lighting, texture maps, on screen particles,
etc.... It involves nothing extra or time consuming from the dev to
take advantage of extra specs when the hardware and SDKs are
Beyond GPU shader performance, it is also
verified the PS4 has GDDR5
memory, which provides a significant boost to overall bandwidth. The PS4
has an API which is leaner and "closer to the metal" (one dev
I spoke with calls the One's API "bloated but workable" by comparison,
no joke). The
PS4 OS uses only 1 GB of memory, leaving 7 GB for games, while the One's
(3) OSes use 3 GB at all times, leaving 5GB for games. This difference
in overall memory allocation for games will no doubt come into play as
well, and will require the One use some "memory" tricks to keep up, such
as tiling via the esRAM cache (which, of course, introduces other
You can try to deny this all you want. And that's fine by me. If you don't want to accept reality I can't force you too. Only time will be able to prove this argument to many observers such as yourself who don't understand hardware spec/design and won't take the time to learn a little about it so you can make informed decisions.
If, however, you'd like to learn a little bit, I'll provide the same link I gave you before: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-spec-analysis-xbox-one
These guys have been a highly respected neutral news/analysis site in the PC gaming/3D graphics arena for the past decade +, and would be a great place to start out to educate yourself and open your eyes to the truth on this issue if you can allow yourself to do so.
Anandtech, another highly respected, long-time vet in the PC hardware online community, also has a One vs PS4 analysis up on his site with remarkably similar conclusions.
Finally, I'll leave you with an article that summarizes words directly from one of the One's chief hardware architects, which I think nicely sums up the hardware comparison. MS has been quietly telling people for months now that the One isn't in the same league as the PS4 and "isn't meant for hardcore gaming", as a way of tempering Xbox fan's expectations:http://www.computerandvideogames.com/408068/xbox-one-does-not-target-the-highest-end-graphics-says-ms-engineer/
@mjswooosh I dont mean to disrespect you, its just that i dont really have any trust in these kind of analysis. And theres an easy way to figure it out and maybe change my mind. Please tell me how much PS4 will be better than Xbox One, the margin of error, and i will see when the consoles launch how that works.
I dont pre-order anything (as i think its stupid) so its something i really will notice when i manage to buy my next-gen.
@mjswooosh Yes, i see your point. But thats why i said there was a huge difference between theoretical performance and real performance.
PS4 has a huge theoretical advantage, but its nonear the same as an Ti560 and GTX680. And like i said even SMALL software differences can render to huge graphics performance improvements., you are just assuming there is none. I doubt any coder you've talked about had a better engineering understandment of their own systems than both Sony and Xbox engineers.
I honestly dont understand why would you try to evaluate specs into account at this point if you can see their real behavior when both consoles launch. All im saying is that is gambling as there will always be erros you are not taking into account.
If all things remain constant, nothing you didnt predict behave anomaly behave anomaly, and everything else behaves the way you sought, then PS4 would have a huge advantage over XBOne. A bunch of too many conditions for any evaluation to be accurate.