By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Digital Foundry: Face-Off: Far Cry 4

Sounds like if you prefer graphics you should get the PS4 version. And if you want a smoother frame rate you should get it on Xbox One. Completely ignoring the PC, of course.

But I see the thread has devolved into a "our technical defenciency is better than your technical defenciency" LOL.



Around the Network

And that is how you do a good MP ubi. Both versions are satisfactory and try to squeeze a little more of each console strength. Going by difference in pixels (other graphical aspects seem similar besides temporal getting a bonus on ps4) ps4 have a little iddling power on gpu that could maybe lock fps ifgpgpu were more mature.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

I'm finding it hilarious how some people are saying they'll take a huge reduction in resolution because of a rare 1 fps drop. Interesting....



What I get from this face-off:

If you have an X1, buy the X1 version
If you have a PS4, buy the PS4 version
If you have a powerful PC, buy the PC version



ZyroXZ2 said:
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.

The sales spike is due to the price cut,Bundles and the exclusives released. Nothing to do with closing the gap. If each game was made from ground up taking advantage of each of the consoles then the PS4 would win every time! You can't make up a hardware gap unless the developers want parity!



Around the Network
LudicrousSpeed said:
Sounds like if you prefer graphics you should get the PS4 version. And if you want a smoother frame rate you should get it on Xbox One. Completely ignoring the PC, of course.

But I see the thread has devolved into a "our technical defenciency is better than your technical defenciency" LOL.

Both have smooth framerates, a rare one frame drop is unnoticeable. However, a huge drop in resolution is. PS4 version is easily the definitive version. 



LudicrousSpeed said:
Sounds like if you prefer graphics you should get the PS4 version. And if you want a smoother frame rate you should get it on Xbox One. Completely ignoring the PC, of course.

But I see the thread has devolved into a "our technical defenciency is better than your technical defenciency" LOL.

So a 1fps drop twice in 5 mins is equal to a 25% drop in resolution and worse AA?
Yeah ill take the much smoother X1 version



LudicrousSpeed said:
Sounds like if you prefer graphics you should get the PS4 version. And if you want a smoother frame rate you should get it on Xbox One. Completely ignoring the PC, of course.

But I see the thread has devolved into a "our technical defenciency is better than your technical defenciency" LOL.

Not quite sure how PS4's unlocked framerate is a technical deficiency. Clearly the developer would have preferred full 1080p for Xb one if they could have achieved a stable frame rate. They couldn't achieve that so they dropped the res by 25% in order to achieve stability. With PS4 no such compromise was necessary as the frame rate at 1080p is identical in the experience of the gamer.

Ps4 does have a technical deficiency relative to PC of course.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

binary solo said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
Sounds like if you prefer graphics you should get the PS4 version. And if you want a smoother frame rate you should get it on Xbox One. Completely ignoring the PC, of course.

But I see the thread has devolved into a "our technical defenciency is better than your technical defenciency" LOL.

Not quite sure how PS4's unlocked framerate is a technical deficiency. Clearly the developer would have preferred full 1080p for Xb one if they could have achieved a stable frame rate. They could achieve that so they dropped the res by 25% in order to achieve stability. With PS4 no such compromise was necessary as the frame rate at 1080p is identical in the experience of the gamer.

Ps4 does have a technical deficiency relative to PC of course.


yep. FC4 looks beautiful on PS4 and runs great. Def the definitive consoole edition. 



Barozi said:

What I get from this face-off:

If you have an X1, buy the X1 version
If you have a PS4, buy the PS4 version
If you have a powerful PC, buy the PC version


I would agree with 1 and 2... but 3 by the review would say "if you have a PC wait for Witchcraft"... the game have framerate issues.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."