@RicanV @Alucard1475 yea it depends on what a game is aspiring to. Destiny wanted to be a sci-fi epic, but it had a terrible story. This game obviously doesn't take itself or anything seriously
@Gamer_4_Fun Yea this appears to be some Nvidia SoC. For $650, including the cost of Windows, one could build a system with a much more powerful CPU and GPU that's upgradeable in a roomy case. If someone just wants a PC for the living room that will run most games at 1080p and 30-45 fps at medium-to-high settings, this actually strikes a good price/performance ratio. But with just a bit more money and a small amount of your own time you can get so, so much more, with the ability to incrementally upgrade for years to come.
Do I care about the native resolution if the game looks gorgeous? Yes, because it will look even better at a higher resolution. In regards to Ubisoft, they're just standing up a straw man and knocking it down. The criticisms are about the forced parity, not any of the other things they keep bringing up. I also find the generalizations about 60 fps to be incorrect and purely subjective. I prefer 60 and don't think it makes any kind of game look "weird and unnatural". The unnatural remark is really odd - it's not like human beings see in 30 fps or something.
@dannydopamine18 Valve gives away some games free, like Tf2 all the time and L4D 1 or 2 on occasion, even Portal I think once or twice. But beyond that it's out of their control - it's up to the publishers of those games. Remember Valve just runs the marketplace, it's the publishers who set prices. EA gives away free games on Origin because they own them.
@ @k9kal85 First, they use x86-64, not x86. There are major differences between the two instruction sets/architectures. Second, it's not "fluff"; I listed tangible engineering differences. Third, those differences I listed are not minimal. Fourth, DX12 developer previews and white papers have been in peoples' hands for about 6 months. We're well aware of what it is capable of and the level of abstraction associated with it. There are already various Nvidia DX12 driver builds available for developers. Lastly, I went into detail on both consoles.
1. The APU's are slightly different, to start - though the CPU on the X1 is at a slightly higher clock, benchmarks reveal that the PS4's performs slightly better (it's more efficient, likely because the APU is based on a newer/greater version). The PS4's GPU is based on a newer chipset, which allows it to perform more graphical tricks and supports more libraries, but it also has 6 more compute units - giving it an effective 50% power lead over that of the X1
2. The PS4 has GDDR5 RAM placed on-die on the APU, close to the CPU and GPU, to reduce latency. The X1 uses DDR3 RAM in a standard config, with 32 MB of eSRAM. The memory controllers on the PS4 are in a different configuration as well to improve bandwidth, which allows for greater ROP's and a 64-bit pipeline compared to the 32-bit pipeline of the X1. This will also allow developers to more easily implement asynchronous computation on the PS4.
3. The PlayStation 4 has two low-level, "close to the metal" API's, GNM and GNM+/X, which allow developers to reduce overhead. The X1 is still awaiting DirectX 12 for something like this - and since DX12 will have to support a wide range of GPU's while GNM is specialized, DX12 will be more abstract and less effective.
So in short, no, the PS4 is not nearly identical to the X1. Just because both of them have a AMD APU and a SATA 3 HDD controller does not make them equal.
@ @k9kal85 "I like how people are coming to assumption that the PS4 was scaled back to be the same as the XB1. Does it state that anywhere?". Yes: http://www.gamespot.com/articles/assassins-creed-unity-runs-at-900p-30fps-on-xbox-o/1100-6422771/
And in what world would 900p look better than 1080p? And what would the resolution have to do with how a game plays?
hansbeej's comments