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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - No parity requirements on Scorpio versus Xbone

Tagged games:

VGPolyglot said:
Azzanation said:
Great news. This will act as a semi next gen consoles than just a basic boost.

Well, just because there are no parity requirements doesn't mean that developers will take advantage of that.

Maybe not 3rd party, but expect it from 1st party games. Halo 6? Horizon 4? Gears 5? 

Doesnt have to be a generation leap, but an all round improvement is what im looking for. 



Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Radek said:

Only if Jaguar Core Next @ 2.3 GHz is 100% faster than old Jaguar @ 1,75 GHz 

 

Which doesn't seem likely.

What?

SvennoJ said:

Unless next gen has a potato as CPU again. Generational leaps are mostly defined y new game engines, made possible by a clean start on more powerful hardware. This gen brought physics based rendering which made the weather effects possible in DriveClub.

Don't forget it brought the likes of Tessellation, Ambient Occlusion and massively increase particle effects and more.

In regards to the CPU specifically, consoles have never really taken CPU performance seriously anyway, it's graphics that helps sell games so consoles tend to spend most of their cost budget on the GPU.

Erm.. PS3 says otherwise.



So Xbox one is a waste then? 



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

twintail said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

 The main reason I have 0 interest in the Pro is that there are parity rules for MP. As someone who plays way more MP than SP, it leaves little to no reason to upgrade.

But you are wrong though. No such parity exists.

Misinformed? Purposely lying to push an xbox agenda?

https://mobile.twitter.com/VG_Dave/status/773620695532273665

There is my proof, plus the fact that no MP game on PS4 has a higher frame rate option. Now, you do have cases such as Battlefield 1, where both consoles target 60 fps, but the Pro hits that target more consistently. But that's not the same as a game running at 30 max on Xbone, and devs allowing Scorpio to exceed that. Something that up until now, Pro does not allow. If Sony has backtracked on that, instead of a snarky reply with no substance, maybe back your post up?

As for Xbox agenda, LOL. Your console warz stuff is cute. If I am mistaken then that's fine, just post it.



All i really care about is that less pc games get held back by console peasantry, i mean, even scorpio is peasant level to a true high end rig, but hey, i can dream.



Around the Network

Interesting. We will see how the execution goes but I think the Scorpio is a much more well thought out machine than the pro is based on what info we got so far. Having system wide SSAA and AF is a much better idea than leaving it upto developers which is what Sony's approach is. And this new info is also great.



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

Azzanation said:
Pemalite said:

What?

Don't forget it brought the likes of Tessellation, Ambient Occlusion and massively increase particle effects and more.

In regards to the CPU specifically, consoles have never really taken CPU performance seriously anyway, it's graphics that helps sell games so consoles tend to spend most of their cost budget on the GPU.

Erm.. PS3 says otherwise.

Yeah I was just thinking that. Original XBox had a good cpu too, as well as XBox 360, heck even the ps2 was no slouch. It's not easy to emulate XBox 360 games even though the architecture isn't all that different. It's this gen that introduced rather weak cpus pared with much more powerful gpus. And true, ps3 orginally wasn't even meant to have a gpu, 2 cell processors instead.

xbox cpu 3 gflops
ps2 cpu 6.2 gflops

XBox360 cpu 115 gflops
ps3 cpu 230 gflops

XBoxOne cpu 112 gflops (147 scorpio)
ps4 cpu 102 gflops (136 pro)

It's different processors ofcourse, yet this gen wasn't any real step forward cpu wise. Ofcourse last gen consoles were sold at a loss and engineered to be close to the cutting edge while this gen consoles had to be cheaper and sold at par.



Azzanation said:
VGPolyglot said:

Well, just because there are no parity requirements doesn't mean that developers will take advantage of that.

Maybe not 3rd party, but expect it from 1st party games. Halo 6? Horizon 4? Gears 5? 

Doesnt have to be a generation leap, but an all round improvement is what im looking for. 

Yeah, Microsoft probably will for sure, but for 3rd parties, I don't think they really want to do it.



twintail said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/VG_Dave/status/773620695532273665

There is my proof, plus the fact that no MP game on PS4 has a higher frame rate option. Now, you do have cases such as Battlefield 4, where both consoles target 60 fps, but the Pro hits that target more consistently. But that's not the same as a game running at 30 max on Xbone, and devs allowing Scorpio to exceed that. Something that up until now, Pro does not allow. If Sony has backtracked on that, instead of a snarky reply with no substance, maybe back your post up?

As for Xbox agenda, LOL. Your console warz stuff is cute. If I am mistaken then that's fine, just post it.

This quote claims Sony says. Yet the authors same article has zero proof Sony said anything. In fact, they have a ND programmar quote, who the author claims was speaking for Sony. But again, nothing in the article backs up this claim. In fact, there is zero understanding as to what the programmer was even talking about. 

Later tweets from the same programmar actually seem to suggest that he was talking about UC4, which makes sense: original PS4 UC4 MP is 60 fps, so there obviously are no gains on the PS4Pro version.

Both DigitalFoundry and the official Sony guide to PS4 pro both claim that frame rates can be increased. 

https://blog.eu.playstation.com/2016/09/08/ps4-pro-the-ultimate-faq/ - 'render higher'

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-how-playstation-4k-neo-and-the-original-ps4-will-co-exist - 'meet or exceed'

There is no backtracking. Devs and publishers are choosing what to do themselves.

Here is another source for you: https://www.videogamer.com/news/multiplayer-games-will-not-run-at-a-faster-frame-rate-on-ps4-pro

Your two links are completely irrelevant. The first one says games utilizing Pro can see higher and more consistent frame rates. I never said that wasn't true. Higher frame rates = single player games. More consistent frame rates = all games. Again, you take a MP game on PS4 that has a 30 or 60 FPS design. It might struggle to hit those. The Pro might hit them more consistently. But you don't see a 30 FPS game getting a 60 FPS option on Pro. And you won't, unless Sony changes their policy. Sony confirmed the policy to VideoGamer, hence the tweet I posted. I gave you another link from a Naughty Dog guy talking about MP games in general, not just his Uncharted 4 game.

Your second link is a list of hypotheticals and guesses from Digital Foundry. And like the first link, it's irrelevant in regards to higher frame rate settings in MP games. Yes, Pro games frame rates must "meet or exceed" base PS4 games. Yet, that doesn't specify anything about MP games.

I've provided all the evidence I need to support my post. Not to mention I also have reality, which to date we have not seen a single game target a higher frame rate option for MP. Again, if I'm wrong, just name the game. If this is as obvious as you make it seem to be then you should easily be able to whip out a list of games that prove me wrong, or concrete info Sony put out that actually says developers can give us higher frame rate settings in MP.

You seem hung up on the idea that I am saying this is a Sony policy. If it makes you feel better, I could just as easily say the Pro is not powerful enough to give us higher frame rate options instead of pointing to Sony's parity policy that numerous websites confirm exist and I've only ever seen one person say it doesn't :)



There should never be a parity lock. That's just dumb.

1. Build on the more powerful platforms.
2. Use excellent scaling functionality within middleware tools to allow the game to run well on other platforms.

This is how gaming can continue to move steadily forward without surging costs at "generations".