A lot of comparison between the way mobiles release new
hardware on a regular basis as opposed to the console market. What do you guys
think?
Without putting a negative skew on this topic, is there
really a way to make consoles a good investment and value for money? Right now I
think it’s in disarray...corporate mainstream garbage. Something needs to
change.
honestly developers have said they are hitting performance walls as is. these consoles cannot go on for as long as Sony and Microsoft would hope. games will really be held back graphically if they try to force that. these consoles need turned over at least every three years with the cycle shortened to five. currently its about 7 to 8 years before new console with a cycle being 10 years. cycle meaning end of console support.
however even with them getting a new console every three years, PC graphics will have gotten two to three new generations of graphics cards from AMD and NVIDIA...so...consoles still holding us back
Games consoles get very optimized ports.
The last generation of hardware had 512MB of RAM yet was running games like Battlefeild 4 no problem at the end of their lives (Battlefeild 4). 2005-2006 is when they were launched, 8 years ago.
The last game ever realesed for the Sony PlayStation 2 was FIFA 14 (yes a football simulater for the 2014 season).
These consoles aren't meant to be like phones. They are meant to last a long time on the market, at least from what we've seen in the last three generations.
Sony and Microsoft messed up if they want these consoles to last as long as the ps3 and xbox 360. The last generation was so cutting edge when they can out that the strongest super computer in the world for a while was comprised of daisy chained ps3's since that cell processor or what ever its called was so good at the time. Now the jaguar 8 cores in the new consoles are multiples slower then 8350's. The processor doesn't need to be that strong, but really it would be smart if they had gone with something that had core performance similar to a low end I5 or at least a generation or 2 old I5. Then the graphics... c'mon guy these consoles can only dream of playing games at 4k natively. They can barely achieve 1080p so quadrupling that resolution is a laughable proposition. The R5 graphics are going to be maxed out playing 4k video to be honest. They should have, in my opinion, gone for at least Gtx 770 performance range. I remember the LTTS video where they should a gtx 480 or something running at 500ish mhz besting the integrated PlayStation and Xbox's amd R5 graphics. It is obvious that if Sony and Microsoft had done with the last gen and make then super expensive, that they would have been able to put some actually beefy hardware in there. AMD sure as hell could have made chips capable of 4k at reasonable settings and a cpu with some respectable performance. 860k + R9 285 or something. Possibly like this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JnmWCJ And since they aren't paying retail for parts, that $650 is going to be much lower. Then they retail at $700 a pop and have something that will actually be capable of lasting and playing at good settings long into the future. Definitely capable of being half decent for 8 years like the old ones were.
Yes consoles are very optimised as each developer knows exactly what hardware will be used. However no matter how well the game is made can pc level graphics be used on 512mb ram. So the console life is extended by developers learning new methods for getting more out of them. However there will always be the problem of the games being held back near the end of the console life.
And as had been made clear by the end off the 360 era consoles most people that use them don't seem to care about the graphics or fps, perhaps because they haven't know much else or that they do prefer the arcady gene play that most console games offer so they don't care. But sadly I think consoles are here to stay, and at least we can use the As something to laugh at in the pc world ams something for people who just want a quick casual gaming device
I think they will be small form factor PC's mroe than a console but maybe they could name it as such... provide on optimized OS for that hardware... and stick with x86-64
6 years seems a good life cycle to me. 3-4 would be too short to be worthwhile.
I don't understand why people treat consoles like they're these horrible inventions. Their existence doesn't affect us. If developers are complaining about the consoles lack of performance, then that means that PC ports will be that much better, since devs will have much more to work with. We're at a point where PC gaming is becoming a very trendy thing. It's pretty common to be a PC gamer. Even to the point where more games are being released on linux. AND even more on the way because of steam OS, and the increase in the linux community because of Ubuntu. We'll get ours. It's kind of annoying to see consoles as such a negative topic among PC enthusiasts, considering we're proud owners of much more powerful machines. Also having a simple living room machine fits the needs of some people. Not everyone wants to get a custom built steam box, or any form of computer, made for their living room. They just want to pop a disk in and play a game. Along with my PC I own a ps4. The only game I play on it is bloodborne, right now. But I'm not ashamed of playing it. To be honest, the amount of performance they got out of the ps4 is good enough for the average consumer. And no matter how much devs complain, they don't sign their own paychecks. The fact that their games are being made for consoles means that they sold out in some way. They work for a company that demands they make it work somehow.