I find so many multiplats are fricking garbage now too, considering they're made by Ubisoft, EA or Square Enix. The companies making amazing games are usually dedicating them to one system. Capcom have had an amazing track record though in recent years.
both snoy and microshit lost the console wars the moment they banned japanese games with fanservice. Now Nintendo has all that and they are making billions.
The PS4/PS5 and Xbox are not consoles in any identifiable way, they are literally rebadged AMD Ryzen gaming PCs.
Last gen you had Xbox 360 on PowerPC, and PS3 alone had a 3.2 GHz PowerPC-based "Power Processing Element" (PPE) and six accessible Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs). Both running at 3.2GHZ on powerPC architecture, which at the time was ahead of x86. It took years before the CPU's on PC were able to catch up.
The N64 has a NEC MIPS-based CPU and an SGI GPU. The GameCube has an IBM PowerPC-based CPU and an ATI GPU. Switch itself uses Nvidia's tegra X1.
PS3 and the original Xbox both had Nvidia chips in em but it was so horrible working with Nvidia that neither company has worked with them since. AMD on the other hand is doing some excellent work when it comes to custom solutions and are currently the only game in town for a one-stop-shop for such things. If it weren't for AMD they'd probably still use completely custom chips in consoles.
As soon as Sony adopted the x86 platform, it was over. The PS4/PS5 is just a cheap low-end PC with nothing to make it unique. PS4/PS5 are essentially x86 amd pcs running a OpenGL/Vulcan compatible GPU on top of a BSD based OS. couple that with numerous games using ue4x and its pretty easy and economical to put games on more machines. Microsoft thinks ahead because they have to due to their directx api, they need to be on the cutting edge. sony doesn't. so when xbox gets machine learning upscaling and PS5 doesn't, don't be surprised. sony abandoned the cutting edge with the ps3.
Xbox One, XBox X/S, PS4, and PS5 are all x86_64. Original Xbox was x86 as well. Wonderswan is also x86 compatible, for what that's worth. Xbox 360 was the first ever GPU with unified shading and remained that way for like 6 months
>The PS4/PS5 and Xbox are not consoles in any identifiable way
I didn't even read the rest of your post because of how obviously and immediately wrong this is. When your argument hinges entirely on semantics, you've already lost.
He's right tho. It's literally Ryzen/RDNA APUs (last gen it was Athlon/GCN) that run optimized versions of games. There's nothing unique such as ESRAM or differences in Antialiasing/video and audio processing or particle effects like you would see in the 8th gen and prior. The only excpetion is the Swtich and that's literally an Nvidia Shield.
He's wrong for the only reason that matters - reality. They are presented as, marketed as, and sold as consoles. And people consider them consoles. Sell the PS6 with a keyboard and mouse and people still won't replace their desktops with one. The actual dictionary definition does not matter one bit as long as it doesn't reflect reality. People are WAY too obsessed with categorizing everything at the expense of actual discourse.
>They are presented as, marketed as, and sold as consoles
So where's the line? Are Steam Machines consoles? Is the Deck not a portable PC? Is a Wii running linux a PC? >Sell the PS6 with a keyboard and mouse and people still won't replace their desktops with one
Yeah because it's not KBM that makes consoles different, it's software. The only reason why consoles are currently considered that and not PCs despite the fact that you can run Linux on many of them is because of licensing, not hardware or advertisement. That's why the console market has lost massive market share to PC in general, there simply is no reason to buy one when it has literally the exact same features and hardware as a PC that costs about the same yet offers much weaker software.
Is the original xbox not a console then? That was effectively a prebuilt with a Pentium 3.
I would say so, sure. The Nvidia in the OG Box was sort of weird and the P3 had less cache than the desktop part, but overall, it's quite close. This generation is something else tho, you can pretty much build a PC with identical specs to the consoles with the only exception being lack of unified memory.
>So where's the line?
Just because someone can't point out the line does not mean that it doesn't exist. How many hairs must one lose before he's considered balding? No one can give a number, but you'll agree that balding is a thing.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Everyone is balding anon. At all times. Consoles are a set thing and not really a process, so you can compare them to x86 based PCs have been around forever. There are always distinctions between the two but hardware optimization which is what essentially differentiates the two is a very real thing. It's why many PC ports of games are just rebadged console versions and why you can't make a distinction between the two in such cases. There is no line anymore, it's literally the exact same thing with one running closed source software. The only thing stopping MS from running Steam on the Xbox is writing Windows-based drivers for the thing and releasing them to the public. Contrast that to the hardware of the PS3 or even the Wii U and you couldn't/can't even get anything like it as a consumer part.
11 months ago
Anonymous
The differences are bigger than you think. The process of compiling software for a different architecture is mostly trivialised in modern compilers. Getting software library compatibility on the other hand is much harder.
Xbox uses DirectX12 and so does the PC, but a PC game has access to damn near 40 years of windows libraries to achieve their goals and as a result trying to get compatibility with any random game on Steam would require playing whack a mole with a grab bag of random libraries that the devs just happened to use because they baby-ducked on win32 or MFC and not WinForms or whatever...
Even at the hardware level, getting Linux to run on a PS4 for instance was a shit tonne of work. The guy who did it said "this is not a PC" because all the shit linux assumes is there because it's always been there in the standard is either not present or implemented in a weird proprietary way. It's not a stretch of the imagination to say that the PS4 is actually the ARM SoC that runs the security and hardware management and the x86 APU part is merely an accelerator.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Obviously there are major differences when designing a closed source system and one that is assumed to run any modern OS, what I'm getting at is from a pure gamers' perspective and talking about games that are already running on current-gen consoles. If stuff such as PowerPC, Cell, RISC processors, ESRAM and the frickery that was the Emotion Engine were commonplace in consoles while they were largely inaccessible to the public, it feels really fricking boring that the current gen is just an undervolted Ryzen 3700X/some variant of an RDNA2 graphics card. For both home consoles.
You kinda fell for the marketing bro. Doom on calculators is interesting, PowerPC processors (literally used in Macs for years) are not inherently less PC than AMD.
PS5 and XSX actually continue the tradition that console CPUs are always massively gimped. PS3 and X360 didn't support out of order execution while PS5 and XSX have massively reduced L3 and gimped FPU specifically because they asked AMD to do that for making the die smaller and cheaper.
PS3 did support out of order execution. It's why it wasn't massively slower than the 360 when the latter had more PPC cores.
I wouldn't worry about the FPU being gimped. It's only there for binary back compat. The x87 instruction set by modern standards is dogshit and based in the ancient history of CPU co-processor logic. Attempts to speed it up have only had moderate success. All modern compiled code prefers the vector units outside of CPU specific optimisations.
There's a good chance the performance profiling told them they don't need a large L3 cache. L3 cache tends to be used as a crutch on modern OSs that are running hundreds of background services. A console shouldn't have all this and instead is running just the main game binary and a minimal OS and so in theory should not benefit from a large L3 cache.
Point is, they AREN'T pcs and so shouldn't be judged by the same standards since they don't and will never need to handle all the special cases your desktop has to.
The SoC in PS5 and XSX is custom silicon you cannot buy in retail. And why did you ignore that the original Xbox was Intel based? >when xbox gets machine learning upscaling and ps5 doesn't
Upscaling on on RDNA1/2/3 runs on compute. FSR1 was implemented in multiple Switch games and the difference between FSR1 and FSR2 is that FSR1 is spacial while FSR2 is a temporal upscaler. There is not hardware requirements for FSR2 beyond a modern compute platform. It's also a piece of shit that should never be used because DLSS is infinitely superior to it. >PS4/PS5 are essentially x86 amd pcs running a OpenGL/Vulcan compatible GPU
Wrong again, PS4/5 uses GNM which is not based on Vulkan and actually predates it. >Microsoft thinks ahead because they have to due to their directx api, they need to be on the cutting edge
Yes, the shittiest fricking API in existence that causes issues even in decent ports and is bloated. Read the fricking docs, MS has specific pointers how to implement things in their own moronic way like how it handles shader cache because it goes against any other convention. It causes the SeX to fall behind PS5 in multiplats despite SeX being faster, the split bandwidth causing slowdowns is a meme and irrelevant if you know how the memory is accessed on SeX. >sony abandoned the cutting edge with the ps3.
PS4 had a GPU 50% fater than the XOne and didn't gimp its ROPs.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and you write like a street shitting pajeet.
xbox one x literally takes advantage of the fact that it's a console and not a trusted computer device because theres a direct pipeline between the cpu and the SDD, which is how it accomplishes the effect of save stating a game in the background and switching to an entirely different game. Significant load time gains.
Can't do this on a home computer for security reasons. You're a moron.
but snoy is not the richest company in the world
they climbed to the top thanks to their former excellence in hardware, and have been coasting by thanks to that inertia ever since
microsoft on the other hand was already writing dogshit software before the ps1 even released, and they have only gone worse since then, buying their way into the ibdustry with unlimited amounts of US government dirty laundered money via military and espionage deals
>they climbed to the top thanks to their former excellence in hardware
Fricking kek Playstation rose to the top by allying with Square and stabbing Nintendo in the back after they co-developed the Nintendo Playstation then bought off exclusives from the Sega Saturn. They rose through the same tactics MS is trying, by forcing people to buy their system. Guess people already forgot the most mainline FF games have PS exclusive since the 7th.
Nobody made Nintendo choose not to put a CD drive and go with fricking floppy discs for the DD in the fricking 64 other than their own unwillingness to pay for licensing fees
>by allying with Square
More like Square going to Sony because Nintendo were moronic. Sony didn't have to do jack shit >after they co-developed the Nintendo Playstation
The original Playstation was going to be a Mega CD/PCE CD. It shared no hardware with the PS1 >bought off exclusives from the Sega Saturn
what? >They rose through the same tactics MS is trying, by forcing people to buy their system
Nah, they just had incredible third party software. That's it. Sega and Nintendo shat the bed at the wrong time and Sony stole the market. They had the best developer experience, their hardware was cheaper and their marketing was insane. Even as an Xbox/Sega drone, Sony won 5/6th gen because they did everything right.
if that had been against the law, shouldn't the japanese anti trust have intervened? >snoy is being a meanie
vs >anticompetitive behavious
means two different things. timed exclusives are not against the law, out-buying all competition is
That's why US senators brought that to consideration a month ago because that behavior is technically a violation of US-Japan trade treaties.
Of course, everyone started screaming and crying about it.
I don't get what Microsoft's plan is. They are already struggling to release games with all the studios they already own. Do they think they will turn things around by doubling their mismanaged mess of studios? They seem to think they can keep throwing money at their problems without addressing the true issue which is management.
The mismanagement is a legit problem, but because there's no management at all. MS was under the impression that publisher meddling in the studio was the issue, and maybe it was in the past, but not anymore when western studios have gotten infested with incompetent people literally by decree of law.
Getting IPs under their belt means royalties they have to do zero work to get. They get a cut if anyone wants an adaptation, merchandise, or whatever else. These companies have billions already and people fathom numbers like that so the number of IPs your company owns becomes its true value, like how favors become the currency of the ultra-rich and like how companies are willing to pay well over cost for any land just so they can own as much of it as possible.
>Kinect was a wild success though even if it was being called a garbage peripheral.
yea that's why it got decoupled from the system after like a year and abandoned shortly after
>Bro this new console sold SO MANY copies on day 1 it was a massive success
the kinect was a fricking disaster as was every other random attempt to shove waggle shit into games
11 months ago
Anonymous
Bro, I'm not saying I like the Kinect. I'm just saying it was the best selling peripheral ever made at the time. It was going to be required with the Xbox One at launch for a reason.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>It was going to be required with the Xbox One at launch for a reason.
because they designed the xbone that way to be an intrusive piece of shit which backfired in their face immediately and caused them to be a laughing stock for years?
It was literally packaged into the console from day 1, it's the best selling periphereal as much as wii sports was the best selling game on the wii
Were you just not around for this or something? The kinect was a tremendous failure and the only area where it WASN'T a failure is apparently some medical fields where they could use some of the tech to help them there
11 months ago
Anonymous
there was a Kinect on the 360 dumb frick jesus christ shut the frick up and never post again
The kinect was a funny kind of success. It was FOMO'd by people who had nearly drowned in the blanket marketing who had no fricking interest in gaming or being a controller. And then it was memed as some fancy amazing thing for indie developers to use. And they sold so many like this it fricked up the supply chain so hard they had to release a "PC edition" with extra markup to stop people bleeding microsoft's profits by buying a 360 retail connect at a discount so they could have crappy motion capture for their downloaded Miku model.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Kinect was a perfect example of core gamers feeling left out of what they were calling the big thing
Snoys shitpost about how Xbox is irrelevant and no one has an Xbox for a decade now. MS is just using their shitposts against them. Remember if you agree with them then you shouldn't have any issue with the deal.
No. I don't believe console manufacturers should be allowed to acquire studios. I don't care if they are Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo or fricking Atari. No. You make the hardware, other people make the software and if you want to have first party games you do it the hard way like Nintendo and SEGA did, by building up your internal R&Dx/AMx teams. It's the only way it works. By buying a studio you just force two company cultures to smash together and hope the end result is okay. And it never is.
*2nd best
Btw, this is how you argue to alleviate fears of monopoly. Meanwhile snöys strategy was stating that they already have a monopoly and should be helped to maintain it.
if you need to be helped to maintain it, then what you have is not a monopoly.
the ps6 could easily crumble like the wii u and vita did, as long as people refuse to buy it
snoy owns a MAJORITY of the industry, monopoly would mean all of it like windows in the pc landscape [spoiler]since apple is also partly owned by them.[/spoiler]
>if you need to be helped to maintain it, then what you have is not a monopoly.
this is clearly nonsense btw
instead of trying to argue with me I suggest just taking a solid 60 seconds to think really hard about it
I mean they're right.
For as fricking moronic and self-sabotaging as sony is they technically now have a single game for their 3 year old console.
xbox hasn't had a worthwhile game since the 360
I dunno if they still count nintendo as a "rival" but they put out exclusives too at least, they're easily the current winner.
I thought that was the entire point of the gamepass in the first place? Just get money from more subscriber stuff because there's no reason to actually get stuff from them
>Consumers, of their own free will, largely did not want to buy our product so let us buy out the market to force them to buy our product instead
That's an amazing fricking argument to make, jesus fricking christ
Microsoft had Gamepass run through the Xbox App on PC. That's why they count them as Xbox players.
It's basically corporate semantics to boost investor morale.
With your logic we should remove PS extra subs from PS plus plan and only count the premium ones because those are the ones that really are taking advantage of the benefits of PS plus.
I don't know what the PS+ tiers are. It's software subscriptions, I couldn't give a toss. Maybe they should be removed from the stats. Point is when people hear "more xbox players than ever" they think "frick me, microsoft must be selling lots of xbox consoles and games" when in reality it's people taking advantage of super subsidised PC releases where at best microsoft have earned a couple of bucks on the HUGELY discounted windows 11 license they give out like candy to OEMs to stop them researching alternatives.
Pretty risky to declare that your product has failed so that you can spend $70B to acquire more content for your failed platform, especially considering you have like 20 first party devs you've acquired over the years. Who wants to own a failed product for which things are being actively developed, and your users aren't meaningfully tied to via digital marketplaces?
>sony tries to make a monopoly argument via excluding nintendo from their definition of a competitor >this definition makes them into an actual monopoly in the japanese and european market
Just playing the hand that's been dealt. XBOX is, by this arbitrary standard, a struggling console competitor trying to break into a market which their opposition is trying to bar them from via legal action rather than offering a better product. Never mind the fact that xbox wants to be a cloud service more than consoles nowadays or that they gave a completely fair offer to continue offering actiblizz products on all platforms for some time.
Regardless, let them fricking buy actiblizz and either kill them off or trim all the fat until only quality remains either way would be better than their current output
>Source: Dude just trust me
Microsoft winning anything got us into this shitheap. We lost dedicated servers to them, we lost controller innovation to them, we lost free online to them.
You give an inch, they take a mile and then the rest of the industry follows suit as long as people will eventually accept it.
someone should let them know that loss leading only works when you eventually actually release something of worth of your own
nice hype phil, but where's the games? playstation has never been shittier, and xbox is somehow still WORSE.
Fricking this. Microsoft spent the 90s making the computing landscape in general shittier while shutting out anyone with a superior product. Gamepass + studio buyouts were an obvious attempt to use their prior business success strategy in gaming and we can only hope that it doesn't work.
It's pretty much a hard fact that Microsoft's anti-competitive bullshit in the 90s set computing worldwide back at least 10 years. Shit that was commonplace in Unix workstations and mainframes is only just starting to appear on consumer hardware because microsoft forced out companies trying to do it on PCs.
They also held back PC gaming, by delaying their modern queue based DirectX for years and years. When consoles were doing arbitrary multithreaded command queues microsoft was still peddling DX10 and DX11 with their sequential draw calls. nVidia was partly to blame for that too, they knew compute was the future and AMD at the time had the more modern core and so by leaning on studios to not modernise their engines it helped them win benchmarks. But that's another story.
If they buy activision their output would improve ten fold, but at the same time I hope both companies fail, and that would only come if they can't merge together.
Microsoft can't fail. At least, the larger microsoft company can't. They could cut off the xbox division possibly but it's not really feasible for them to go under.
>If they buy activision their output would improve ten fold
ABK have released jack fricking shit besides Diablo, Overwatch and CoD. They're creatively bankrupt.
Who gives a frick about console wars in the slightest ? its all subhuman twitter Black folk who argue about this shit all day rather then actually play vidya, its beyond pathetic, simping for a fricking billion dollar corporation
What war? Xbox and Playstation are both no-games machines.
this. I bought a ___ just for the multiplats
I find so many multiplats are fricking garbage now too, considering they're made by Ubisoft, EA or Square Enix. The companies making amazing games are usually dedicating them to one system. Capcom have had an amazing track record though in recent years.
Fbpb the real winners are tendies
The GotY is only on PS5 right now though
The new spiderman game? It's not exclusive, I saw it at a Regal cinema last week.
>discussingfilm
Tried of the shills for this account.
read the bots' replies. It is something else and annoying.
>don't worry, i'm just a weak old man, looking for my potato~
nice try, phil.
both snoy and microshit lost the console wars the moment they banned japanese games with fanservice. Now Nintendo has all that and they are making billions.
The PS4/PS5 and Xbox are not consoles in any identifiable way, they are literally rebadged AMD Ryzen gaming PCs.
Last gen you had Xbox 360 on PowerPC, and PS3 alone had a 3.2 GHz PowerPC-based "Power Processing Element" (PPE) and six accessible Synergistic Processing Elements (SPEs). Both running at 3.2GHZ on powerPC architecture, which at the time was ahead of x86. It took years before the CPU's on PC were able to catch up.
The N64 has a NEC MIPS-based CPU and an SGI GPU. The GameCube has an IBM PowerPC-based CPU and an ATI GPU. Switch itself uses Nvidia's tegra X1.
PS3 and the original Xbox both had Nvidia chips in em but it was so horrible working with Nvidia that neither company has worked with them since. AMD on the other hand is doing some excellent work when it comes to custom solutions and are currently the only game in town for a one-stop-shop for such things. If it weren't for AMD they'd probably still use completely custom chips in consoles.
As soon as Sony adopted the x86 platform, it was over. The PS4/PS5 is just a cheap low-end PC with nothing to make it unique. PS4/PS5 are essentially x86 amd pcs running a OpenGL/Vulcan compatible GPU on top of a BSD based OS. couple that with numerous games using ue4x and its pretty easy and economical to put games on more machines. Microsoft thinks ahead because they have to due to their directx api, they need to be on the cutting edge. sony doesn't. so when xbox gets machine learning upscaling and PS5 doesn't, don't be surprised. sony abandoned the cutting edge with the ps3.
Xbox One, XBox X/S, PS4, and PS5 are all x86_64. Original Xbox was x86 as well. Wonderswan is also x86 compatible, for what that's worth. Xbox 360 was the first ever GPU with unified shading and remained that way for like 6 months
>The PS4/PS5 and Xbox are not consoles in any identifiable way
I didn't even read the rest of your post because of how obviously and immediately wrong this is. When your argument hinges entirely on semantics, you've already lost.
He's right tho. It's literally Ryzen/RDNA APUs (last gen it was Athlon/GCN) that run optimized versions of games. There's nothing unique such as ESRAM or differences in Antialiasing/video and audio processing or particle effects like you would see in the 8th gen and prior. The only excpetion is the Swtich and that's literally an Nvidia Shield.
He's wrong for the only reason that matters - reality. They are presented as, marketed as, and sold as consoles. And people consider them consoles. Sell the PS6 with a keyboard and mouse and people still won't replace their desktops with one. The actual dictionary definition does not matter one bit as long as it doesn't reflect reality. People are WAY too obsessed with categorizing everything at the expense of actual discourse.
>They are presented as, marketed as, and sold as consoles
So where's the line? Are Steam Machines consoles? Is the Deck not a portable PC? Is a Wii running linux a PC?
>Sell the PS6 with a keyboard and mouse and people still won't replace their desktops with one
Yeah because it's not KBM that makes consoles different, it's software. The only reason why consoles are currently considered that and not PCs despite the fact that you can run Linux on many of them is because of licensing, not hardware or advertisement. That's why the console market has lost massive market share to PC in general, there simply is no reason to buy one when it has literally the exact same features and hardware as a PC that costs about the same yet offers much weaker software.
I would say so, sure. The Nvidia in the OG Box was sort of weird and the P3 had less cache than the desktop part, but overall, it's quite close. This generation is something else tho, you can pretty much build a PC with identical specs to the consoles with the only exception being lack of unified memory.
>So where's the line?
Just because someone can't point out the line does not mean that it doesn't exist. How many hairs must one lose before he's considered balding? No one can give a number, but you'll agree that balding is a thing.
Everyone is balding anon. At all times. Consoles are a set thing and not really a process, so you can compare them to x86 based PCs have been around forever. There are always distinctions between the two but hardware optimization which is what essentially differentiates the two is a very real thing. It's why many PC ports of games are just rebadged console versions and why you can't make a distinction between the two in such cases. There is no line anymore, it's literally the exact same thing with one running closed source software. The only thing stopping MS from running Steam on the Xbox is writing Windows-based drivers for the thing and releasing them to the public. Contrast that to the hardware of the PS3 or even the Wii U and you couldn't/can't even get anything like it as a consumer part.
The differences are bigger than you think. The process of compiling software for a different architecture is mostly trivialised in modern compilers. Getting software library compatibility on the other hand is much harder.
Xbox uses DirectX12 and so does the PC, but a PC game has access to damn near 40 years of windows libraries to achieve their goals and as a result trying to get compatibility with any random game on Steam would require playing whack a mole with a grab bag of random libraries that the devs just happened to use because they baby-ducked on win32 or MFC and not WinForms or whatever...
Even at the hardware level, getting Linux to run on a PS4 for instance was a shit tonne of work. The guy who did it said "this is not a PC" because all the shit linux assumes is there because it's always been there in the standard is either not present or implemented in a weird proprietary way. It's not a stretch of the imagination to say that the PS4 is actually the ARM SoC that runs the security and hardware management and the x86 APU part is merely an accelerator.
Obviously there are major differences when designing a closed source system and one that is assumed to run any modern OS, what I'm getting at is from a pure gamers' perspective and talking about games that are already running on current-gen consoles. If stuff such as PowerPC, Cell, RISC processors, ESRAM and the frickery that was the Emotion Engine were commonplace in consoles while they were largely inaccessible to the public, it feels really fricking boring that the current gen is just an undervolted Ryzen 3700X/some variant of an RDNA2 graphics card. For both home consoles.
Is the original xbox not a console then? That was effectively a prebuilt with a Pentium 3.
For what it's worth, at least Nintendo present their switch with its tablet-dock gimmick. That makes it different from NVIDIA shield.
>when xbox gets machine learning upscaling and PS5 doesn't, don't be surprised
Topkek
You kinda fell for the marketing bro. Doom on calculators is interesting, PowerPC processors (literally used in Macs for years) are not inherently less PC than AMD.
PS5 and XSX actually continue the tradition that console CPUs are always massively gimped. PS3 and X360 didn't support out of order execution while PS5 and XSX have massively reduced L3 and gimped FPU specifically because they asked AMD to do that for making the die smaller and cheaper.
Interesting. But there has to be corners to cut for a $500 "PC" they can't actually even afford to sell for $500
PS3 did support out of order execution. It's why it wasn't massively slower than the 360 when the latter had more PPC cores.
I wouldn't worry about the FPU being gimped. It's only there for binary back compat. The x87 instruction set by modern standards is dogshit and based in the ancient history of CPU co-processor logic. Attempts to speed it up have only had moderate success. All modern compiled code prefers the vector units outside of CPU specific optimisations.
There's a good chance the performance profiling told them they don't need a large L3 cache. L3 cache tends to be used as a crutch on modern OSs that are running hundreds of background services. A console shouldn't have all this and instead is running just the main game binary and a minimal OS and so in theory should not benefit from a large L3 cache.
Point is, they AREN'T pcs and so shouldn't be judged by the same standards since they don't and will never need to handle all the special cases your desktop has to.
The SoC in PS5 and XSX is custom silicon you cannot buy in retail. And why did you ignore that the original Xbox was Intel based?
>when xbox gets machine learning upscaling and ps5 doesn't
Upscaling on on RDNA1/2/3 runs on compute. FSR1 was implemented in multiple Switch games and the difference between FSR1 and FSR2 is that FSR1 is spacial while FSR2 is a temporal upscaler. There is not hardware requirements for FSR2 beyond a modern compute platform. It's also a piece of shit that should never be used because DLSS is infinitely superior to it.
>PS4/PS5 are essentially x86 amd pcs running a OpenGL/Vulcan compatible GPU
Wrong again, PS4/5 uses GNM which is not based on Vulkan and actually predates it.
>Microsoft thinks ahead because they have to due to their directx api, they need to be on the cutting edge
Yes, the shittiest fricking API in existence that causes issues even in decent ports and is bloated. Read the fricking docs, MS has specific pointers how to implement things in their own moronic way like how it handles shader cache because it goes against any other convention. It causes the SeX to fall behind PS5 in multiplats despite SeX being faster, the split bandwidth causing slowdowns is a meme and irrelevant if you know how the memory is accessed on SeX.
>sony abandoned the cutting edge with the ps3.
PS4 had a GPU 50% fater than the XOne and didn't gimp its ROPs.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and you write like a street shitting pajeet.
xbox one x literally takes advantage of the fact that it's a console and not a trusted computer device because theres a direct pipeline between the cpu and the SDD, which is how it accomplishes the effect of save stating a game in the background and switching to an entirely different game. Significant load time gains.
Can't do this on a home computer for security reasons. You're a moron.
>woe is me being the richest company in the world
>please let me buy my way in to force people to buy shit they dont want to buy
Just like Sony with third party exclusives?
but snoy is not the richest company in the world
they climbed to the top thanks to their former excellence in hardware, and have been coasting by thanks to that inertia ever since
microsoft on the other hand was already writing dogshit software before the ps1 even released, and they have only gone worse since then, buying their way into the ibdustry with unlimited amounts of US government dirty laundered money via military and espionage deals
>they climbed to the top thanks to their former excellence in hardware
Fricking kek Playstation rose to the top by allying with Square and stabbing Nintendo in the back after they co-developed the Nintendo Playstation then bought off exclusives from the Sega Saturn. They rose through the same tactics MS is trying, by forcing people to buy their system. Guess people already forgot the most mainline FF games have PS exclusive since the 7th.
Nobody made Nintendo choose not to put a CD drive and go with fricking floppy discs for the DD in the fricking 64 other than their own unwillingness to pay for licensing fees
>by allying with Square
More like Square going to Sony because Nintendo were moronic. Sony didn't have to do jack shit
>after they co-developed the Nintendo Playstation
The original Playstation was going to be a Mega CD/PCE CD. It shared no hardware with the PS1
>bought off exclusives from the Sega Saturn
what?
>They rose through the same tactics MS is trying, by forcing people to buy their system
Nah, they just had incredible third party software. That's it. Sega and Nintendo shat the bed at the wrong time and Sony stole the market. They had the best developer experience, their hardware was cheaper and their marketing was insane. Even as an Xbox/Sega drone, Sony won 5/6th gen because they did everything right.
Moving the goalposts.
Sony is preventing expansion in the Japanese market.
if that had been against the law, shouldn't the japanese anti trust have intervened?
>snoy is being a meanie
vs
>anticompetitive behavious
means two different things. timed exclusives are not against the law, out-buying all competition is
That's why US senators brought that to consideration a month ago because that behavior is technically a violation of US-Japan trade treaties.
Of course, everyone started screaming and crying about it.
This is Microsofts business strategy for the past 30+ years. Microsoft do not compete, just buy out competition.
It's true, consoles are dying tho
They have so many franchises like Banjo, Conker.
They just need to make good games (Yooka sucked), wtf is wrong with Microsoft.
>We lost the console war, our rivals are positioned to continue to dominate.
Despite owning 50% of the games industry M$ is only responsible for 13% of the current vidya releases.
I don't get what Microsoft's plan is. They are already struggling to release games with all the studios they already own. Do they think they will turn things around by doubling their mismanaged mess of studios? They seem to think they can keep throwing money at their problems without addressing the true issue which is management.
The mismanagement is a legit problem, but because there's no management at all. MS was under the impression that publisher meddling in the studio was the issue, and maybe it was in the past, but not anymore when western studios have gotten infested with incompetent people literally by decree of law.
Getting IPs under their belt means royalties they have to do zero work to get. They get a cut if anyone wants an adaptation, merchandise, or whatever else. These companies have billions already and people fathom numbers like that so the number of IPs your company owns becomes its true value, like how favors become the currency of the ultra-rich and like how companies are willing to pay well over cost for any land just so they can own as much of it as possible.
Merely posturing
PFFFFFFT
This is going to be so embarrassing if the deal doesn't go through. Xbox will be a shitposting target forever
>Xbox will be a shitposting target forever
Always has been m8
Who takes Xbox seriously?
It already is one.
when was the kinect first announced? that's the date you are thinking of
Kinect was a wild success though even if it was being called a garbage peripheral. The jokes really came in with TV TV TV
>Kinect was a wild success though even if it was being called a garbage peripheral.
yea that's why it got decoupled from the system after like a year and abandoned shortly after
It was a success when it launched, it just didn't stay that way
>Bro this new console sold SO MANY copies on day 1 it was a massive success
the kinect was a fricking disaster as was every other random attempt to shove waggle shit into games
Bro, I'm not saying I like the Kinect. I'm just saying it was the best selling peripheral ever made at the time. It was going to be required with the Xbox One at launch for a reason.
>It was going to be required with the Xbox One at launch for a reason.
because they designed the xbone that way to be an intrusive piece of shit which backfired in their face immediately and caused them to be a laughing stock for years?
It was literally packaged into the console from day 1, it's the best selling periphereal as much as wii sports was the best selling game on the wii
Were you just not around for this or something? The kinect was a tremendous failure and the only area where it WASN'T a failure is apparently some medical fields where they could use some of the tech to help them there
there was a Kinect on the 360 dumb frick jesus christ shut the frick up and never post again
The kinect was a funny kind of success. It was FOMO'd by people who had nearly drowned in the blanket marketing who had no fricking interest in gaming or being a controller. And then it was memed as some fancy amazing thing for indie developers to use. And they sold so many like this it fricked up the supply chain so hard they had to release a "PC edition" with extra markup to stop people bleeding microsoft's profits by buying a 360 retail connect at a discount so they could have crappy motion capture for their downloaded Miku model.
Kinect was a perfect example of core gamers feeling left out of what they were calling the big thing
Snoys shitpost about how Xbox is irrelevant and no one has an Xbox for a decade now. MS is just using their shitposts against them. Remember if you agree with them then you shouldn't have any issue with the deal.
No. I don't believe console manufacturers should be allowed to acquire studios. I don't care if they are Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo or fricking Atari. No. You make the hardware, other people make the software and if you want to have first party games you do it the hard way like Nintendo and SEGA did, by building up your internal R&Dx/AMx teams. It's the only way it works. By buying a studio you just force two company cultures to smash together and hope the end result is okay. And it never is.
"Sony is the best, we can't be Sony. If Sony put it's dick in front of us, we'd say 'how long should I suck sir?'"
*2nd best
Btw, this is how you argue to alleviate fears of monopoly. Meanwhile snöys strategy was stating that they already have a monopoly and should be helped to maintain it.
if you need to be helped to maintain it, then what you have is not a monopoly.
the ps6 could easily crumble like the wii u and vita did, as long as people refuse to buy it
snoy owns a MAJORITY of the industry, monopoly would mean all of it like windows in the pc landscape [spoiler]since apple is also partly owned by them.[/spoiler]
>if you need to be helped to maintain it, then what you have is not a monopoly.
this is clearly nonsense btw
instead of trying to argue with me I suggest just taking a solid 60 seconds to think really hard about it
>the us government is plotting to prop up snoy to the detriment of the cia backed microsoft
>greentexting some random bullshit nobody said nor implied because you are moronic
then who the frick is helping snoy maintain a monopoly you monumental moron
I consider the legal system giving any time of day to massive corporations lawfaring each other to be help
>consistently make the shittiest product every gen
>complain nobody wants to buy your shit product
>Sony and Microsoft are now in a competition to make themselves look as shitty and helpless as possible
This is fricking hilarious.
>Nintendo right now
>Nintendo laughing because they know they are the trash of gaming company and there's no need for them to fight
yeah, for sony
Nintendo won with a shitty underpowered console.
it feels to me like Activision Blizzard is a company in decline but I guess there is an unlimited appetite for Call of Duty and Diablo?
They ARE in decline that's why they desperate wanted someone to buy them. Which is Xbox.
The reason this is happening right now is because they are in serious financial trouble
well they're not wrong
literally no one except shills care about xbox
Thank you, the deal should go through then.
they could have funded like 50 triple A games instead of this moronic bs
I mean they're right.
For as fricking moronic and self-sabotaging as sony is they technically now have a single game for their 3 year old console.
xbox hasn't had a worthwhile game since the 360
I dunno if they still count nintendo as a "rival" but they put out exclusives too at least, they're easily the current winner.
I thought that was the entire point of the gamepass in the first place? Just get money from more subscriber stuff because there's no reason to actually get stuff from them
>Consumers, of their own free will, largely did not want to buy our product so let us buy out the market to force them to buy our product instead
That's an amazing fricking argument to make, jesus fricking christ
It's been going swimmingly for epic, though ms is (presumably) less moronic than them
>Americans losing another war
Par the course
Spencer said yesterday that they have more Xbox players than ever before.
They count PC gamepass subscribers as "xbox players." And since a gamepass subscriber is still a loss leader, that's not a good thing necessarily.
>They count PC gamepass subscribers as "xbox players.
So they should count them as PS plus players or Nintendo players?
Microsoft had Gamepass run through the Xbox App on PC. That's why they count them as Xbox players.
It's basically corporate semantics to boost investor morale.
With your logic we should remove PS extra subs from PS plus plan and only count the premium ones because those are the ones that really are taking advantage of the benefits of PS plus.
I don't know what the PS+ tiers are. It's software subscriptions, I couldn't give a toss. Maybe they should be removed from the stats. Point is when people hear "more xbox players than ever" they think "frick me, microsoft must be selling lots of xbox consoles and games" when in reality it's people taking advantage of super subsidised PC releases where at best microsoft have earned a couple of bucks on the HUGELY discounted windows 11 license they give out like candy to OEMs to stop them researching alternatives.
>Jim Ryan is being raped now in the trial
Delicious.
Link?
Not him but here ya go
https://www.ign.com/articles/xboxs-big-activision-blizzard-ftc-trial-has-begun-what-you-need-to-know-and-our-coverage-so-far
Pretty risky to declare that your product has failed so that you can spend $70B to acquire more content for your failed platform, especially considering you have like 20 first party devs you've acquired over the years. Who wants to own a failed product for which things are being actively developed, and your users aren't meaningfully tied to via digital marketplaces?
>sony tries to make a monopoly argument via excluding nintendo from their definition of a competitor
>this definition makes them into an actual monopoly in the japanese and european market
Just playing the hand that's been dealt. XBOX is, by this arbitrary standard, a struggling console competitor trying to break into a market which their opposition is trying to bar them from via legal action rather than offering a better product. Never mind the fact that xbox wants to be a cloud service more than consoles nowadays or that they gave a completely fair offer to continue offering actiblizz products on all platforms for some time.
Regardless, let them fricking buy actiblizz and either kill them off or trim all the fat until only quality remains either way would be better than their current output
nintendo would be even more light years ahead of sony/ms if only their hardware didn't suck dick
there's practically no competition
>Source: Dude just trust me
Microsoft winning anything got us into this shitheap. We lost dedicated servers to them, we lost controller innovation to them, we lost free online to them.
You give an inch, they take a mile and then the rest of the industry follows suit as long as people will eventually accept it.
They should just go full PC anyways (And they might after this)
Only problem would be Hardware manufactures continuing to price gouge
should have tried making consoles and not ruining the console market turning everything into a failed pc
>rooting for a corporation
>twatter thread
die
These companies aren't your friends. None of them are.
Xbox admitted they make shit consoles that sell terribly and they think they can rectify the problem with money.
someone should let them know that loss leading only works when you eventually actually release something of worth of your own
nice hype phil, but where's the games? playstation has never been shittier, and xbox is somehow still WORSE.
Fricking this. Microsoft spent the 90s making the computing landscape in general shittier while shutting out anyone with a superior product. Gamepass + studio buyouts were an obvious attempt to use their prior business success strategy in gaming and we can only hope that it doesn't work.
It's pretty much a hard fact that Microsoft's anti-competitive bullshit in the 90s set computing worldwide back at least 10 years. Shit that was commonplace in Unix workstations and mainframes is only just starting to appear on consumer hardware because microsoft forced out companies trying to do it on PCs.
They also held back PC gaming, by delaying their modern queue based DirectX for years and years. When consoles were doing arbitrary multithreaded command queues microsoft was still peddling DX10 and DX11 with their sequential draw calls. nVidia was partly to blame for that too, they knew compute was the future and AMD at the time had the more modern core and so by leaning on studios to not modernise their engines it helped them win benchmarks. But that's another story.
Consolewars are gay and I hope both Playststion and Xbox lose.
Blizzard is also gay and I hope they suffer immensely.
Jim Ryan says that he doesnt believe MS will make COD exclusive.
at this point, i want to see the deal go through just to see jim get ousted
we can't go worse than that, right?
Making COD exclusive is moronic. That would melt billions in the western gacha market that people pretend doesnt exist.
If Jim Ryan is saying "actually we'll be fine if the deal goes through :)" then legitimately what the frick is the problem here?
>Sony, Nintendo-sama, I kneel
If they buy activision their output would improve ten fold, but at the same time I hope both companies fail, and that would only come if they can't merge together.
Microsoft can't fail. At least, the larger microsoft company can't. They could cut off the xbox division possibly but it's not really feasible for them to go under.
>If they buy activision their output would improve ten fold
ABK have released jack fricking shit besides Diablo, Overwatch and CoD. They're creatively bankrupt.
Xbox is a platform, not a console.
both the microsoft store and xcloud are horse shit.
ironically enough, the physical console used to be the only good thing about the xbox brand
K
9000
Microsoft is currently getting roasted on trial.
Not really.
>judge asking if Minecraft is telling you where to go in real life
Who gives a frick about console wars in the slightest ? its all subhuman twitter Black folk who argue about this shit all day rather then actually play vidya, its beyond pathetic, simping for a fricking billion dollar corporation
Yakuza 0 is rated 85 but I've enjoyed it more than most 90+ rated games ngl
>Pete Hines just randomly dropping that Indiana Jones is exclusive to Xbox
lol