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

Forums - Gaming - Xbox 720 Is Similar to PS4, Ubisoft Says

snyps on 03 April 2013
walsufnir said:
DietSoap said:
snyps said:
So no tablet controller

 They already have Smartglass for that... In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they took it one step further and showed off a Microsoft manufactured Windows 8 tablet with physical controls to fully take advantage of it on par with the Vita and Wii U controller as well.

 

... Now I've got myself excited over all kinds of possibilities that would imply...

I can think of "remote play" on any device with support for smartglass. This would really be awesome.



im about to piss all over ur parade so grab an umbrella. I have smart glass amd it does nothing for games. It cant even do youtube correctly. But a controller add on for a windows tablet could work. But if I thought vita was an expensive controller.. Try spending a cool grand for a win8 tablet controller. Maybe they willake a win8 mini thatd be cooler. But still! $500 for a console $500 for a controller. And with out an att&ch rate there will be no support besides latency ridden streaming. Dont settle for crumbs guys.. Demand a true solution! A tablet packed with every box! That would make me very happy!



Around the Network
DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?



DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
snyps said:
walsufnir said:
DietSoap said:
snyps said:
So no tablet controller

 They already have Smartglass for that... In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they took it one step further and showed off a Microsoft manufactured Windows 8 tablet with physical controls to fully take advantage of it on par with the Vita and Wii U controller as well.

 

... Now I've got myself excited over all kinds of possibilities that would imply...

I can think of "remote play" on any device with support for smartglass. This would really be awesome.



im about to piss all over ur parade so grab an umbrella. I have smart glass amd it does nothing for games. It cant even do youtube correctly. But a controller add on for a windows tablet could work. But if I thought vita was an expensive controller.. Try spending a cool grand for a win8 tablet controller. Maybe they willake a win8 mini thatd be cooler. But still! $500 for a console $500 for a controller. And with out an att&ch rate there will be no support besides latency ridden streaming. Dont settle for crumbs guys.. Demand a true solution! A tablet packed with every box! That would make me very happy!



Have you heard about Nintendos new console? Its called WiiU.



walsufnir on 03 April 2013
snyps said:
walsufnir said:
DietSoap said:
snyps said:
So no tablet controller

 They already have Smartglass for that... In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they took it one step further and showed off a Microsoft manufactured Windows 8 tablet with physical controls to fully take advantage of it on par with the Vita and Wii U controller as well.

 

... Now I've got myself excited over all kinds of possibilities that would imply...

I can think of "remote play" on any device with support for smartglass. This would really be awesome.



im about to piss all over ur parade so grab an umbrella. I have smart glass amd it does nothing for games. It cant even do youtube correctly. But a controller add on for a windows tablet could work. But if I thought vita was an expensive controller.. Try spending a cool grand for a win8 tablet controller. Maybe they willake a win8 mini thatd be cooler. But still! $500 for a console $500 for a controller. And with out an att&ch rate there will be no support besides latency ridden streaming. Dont settle for crumbs guys.. Demand a true solution! A tablet packed with every box! That would make me very happy!


I don't need an umbrella but perhaps you need something called possibility. The fact that smartglass by now isn't working the way you expect it to do doesn't mean it won't in future.



snyps on 03 April 2013

@dieappledie lol its starting to look like nintendo knows what theyre doing! Lets see how long it takes the competition to figure it out this gen ;)



Around the Network
D-Minaj225 on 03 April 2013
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



 

DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...



D-Minaj225 on 03 April 2013
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games



 

enditall727 on 03 April 2013
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games

yea i was under the impression that the Gamecube had the best graphics out of the 3 until Conker Live and Reloaded came out on Xbox

 

That game looked damn good and it was also the last game from that generation i played



DieAppleDie on 03 April 2013
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
D-Minaj225 said:
DieAppleDie said:
DietSoap said:
DieAppleDie said:
Tabular said:
So... does 50% less GPU performance equal being aligned?



Like the original Xbox being 2x times more powerul than PS2? Raw numbers are raw.


The original Xbox was whole lot more than just 2 times as good looking, though that was more do to effective VRAM (since the Xbox was all unified after all) and the incredible texturing difference plus usually twice the resolution w/ most PS2 games running 480i and than anything to do with flops. Roughly 1.2gb of texture data on screen per second on the PS2 vs about 34gb of texture data on screen per second on the Xbox peak.



So why GT4 looks better than PG and Forza? And GoWII and FFXII look better than anything on Xbox? Xbox games had better textures? And what about everythingelse?

better gameplay?



We are talking about grafix here. The fact that PS2 was so maxed out that it outperformed Xbox in many cases seems to cause major butthurt here... GC was the best out of the 3 anyway...

if your refering to me as butthurt then your mistaken besides what ps2 game looked better than conker? and if gc was the best why is it in last place? graphics are pretty to look at but they dont help the games



Conker? Dont make me laugh...all that post processing effects cant make up for such tiny, low poly models/environments. GC selling the least doesnt mean a shit in terms of tech performance, you know it right? Plus im a gameplay over grafix guy 100%, so i hope you werent referring to ME on that regard...