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

Forums - Gaming - Games look better on Xbox One compared to PS4?

random15 on 01 December 2013

This Xbots are blind from all that pixel counting they did last gen.


User has been banned for this post ~Barozi



Around the Network
Panicnausia on 01 December 2013
kirby007 said:
Panicnausia said:
kirby007 said:

The PS4 version clearly struggled though, and likewise, for fully saturated 64-player Conquest Large games what we get here is a frame-rate that falls far below 60fps. Flood Zone gives us the biggest drop, going down to 30fps while swimming through a submerged ground floor of a building, but the overall experience across a breadth of levels is predominantly between 40-50fps on both Xbox One and PS4. Much of this has to do with the destruction dynamic, where walking through the debris of a levelled skyscraper in the Siege on Shanghai stage gives us a constant 40fps, for example.

Smooth eh?

altho depends on the game

 

FIFA 14: the Digital Foundry verdict

As performance metrics stabilise at either a clean 30 or 60fps, we're left short on ways to truly distinguish the two next-gen versions on any technical level. That being the case, it's worth noting the Xbox One version does offer a minor advantage in content with its exclusive Ultimate Team "Legends," opening up access to classic players like Pelé, Lineker and Zola. It's perhaps not the most essential feature given the rarity of these cards, and the potential expenditure on packs to seek them out, but it's a clear point in favour of the Xbox One release.

Speaking of content, certain modes are stripped back compared to the PS3 and 360 editions - Be a Pro and Tournament options, for example. Getting the game out in a reasonable time-frame likely took precedence this year, but on the plus side, the honed focus does mean the Ignite Engine lands on both feet to give the definitive on-pitch experience.

In all, putting aside nit-picks in gamma that suggest a slight black push on the Xbox One, both releases are a match in every other conceivable sense. The 1080p presentation backed up by 2xMSAA is sumptuous to behold, and sidesteps the upscaling and post-processing seen in other games that tend to spoil all the hard work. As a result, FIFA 14 easily ranks as the most crisply presented next-gen game released yet, and for time time being, a solid showcase of the next-gen difference to any passer-by.

 


PS4 has 30% more resolution and same frate rate.. proves the point. Also slo like how you cherry picked parts to help your argument. DF says overall the ps4 had a more consistent higher frame rate. There are aslso other games that you ignored that look a lot better on PS4, like assassin creed 4, cod ghosts. Frameraste was above 60 on PS4.


Never said fifa was better on PS4 whats your point? Fifa is not a demanding game like BF 4 is. Fifa are basically identical.

@bolded getting a bit farfetched don't you think? i provided a game which is equal on both platforms and it doesn't count? wow brilliant

Where did I say it doesn't count?? You are dillusional if you think fifa is as demanding asthe massive maps and destruction of BF.



kirby007 on 01 December 2013
fatslob-:O said:
All of those games look worse on the X1 and there's no getting past around that. Early on this generation 1080p should be a standard for console gaming and the X1 fell short of it as well as the WII U. As a PC gamer I'm not impressed by either of the consoles especially by the fact that the most powerful console so far couldn't run BF4 in 1080p.

chef read before you post, fifa being identical doesn't count ?....



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Panicnausia on 01 December 2013
d21lewis said:
Shinobi-san said:

I wasnt talking about all games. My post wasnt meant to be disingenuous.

At the beginning of the gen...360 multiplat games were superior to PS3 versions. Later on the difference became less of an issue. Atleast for the last two or three years most of digital foundry articles have either been a draw or a slight win to 360 and on the rare occasion a win to the PS3. And ive read just about every digital foundry article.

Even in the worst case scenario...a game like Bayonetta where the PS3 version was shit. There was never really a difference like we have now. Where games are running at almost double the res and in some cases with higher fps as well. Theoretically speaking we probably have the biggest discrepancies in power we have ever seen on consoles.

The GPU's in the consoles are simply in different classes. Thats why some games are running at double the res on PS4 so quickly. Its not because it cant be done on the X1 its just that its that easy to get it working on PS4. And why wouldnt it be? Its a glorified HD7860 (i made that up! but you should ge the point).

I kinda knew this was gonna happen though. PS fans were always going to blow a difference like this out of proportion and to follow it up MS fans would simply call bullshit. This just happens to be the one time where PS fans arent talking shit even if they are... -_-

Edit: Kinda went off track there but my point is that if you try the bolded...you will see the difference. It will be obvious. And if you play at a higher res all the time you wont go back. No one goes back.

Ever!?  I'm gonna leave this thread because tech stuff just isn't my forte but still.....ever??

Don't you remember the days when Nes versions of games had to be single player while Master System versions were two player because the Nes was just too weak?  Or when the Genesis version of games had no voices and missed half of the color or frames of animation of their Super Nes counterpart because, aside from the processor, the Genesis was so limited?  Or when, during the 6th gen, PS2 and Gamecube versions of games like Splinter Cell had to have the levels re-designed because the Xbox was so much more powerful (Yeah, people say it was a tie between the 'Cube and the Xbox but there were too many examples of the Gamecube version being short changed).

I think one version looking a little sharper than the other is virtually a non-existent gap in power.  When the Xbox One version of games start having less characters on screen or start missing effects, THEN we can talk.  As it stands, both versions of multi-plats on PS4/XBO offer the exact same experience barring any exclusivity deals.


They dont offer the same experience........Resolution is  a better experience and so is better performance.   If you dont care about graphics differences why are you posting in a thread about them?

 

IN BF trying to shoot tiny characters miles away on a map resolution makes a noticebale difference.



Figgycal on 01 December 2013

Certain games, like Fifa and Call of Duty: Ghost should have no problem being 1080p 60fps consistently on both consoles. Anything less is just incompetence or laziness from the developers.



Around the Network
Panicnausia on 01 December 2013
kirby007 said:
fatslob-:O said:
All of those games look worse on the X1 and there's no getting past around that. Early on this generation 1080p should be a standard for console gaming and the X1 fell short of it as well as the WII U. As a PC gamer I'm not impressed by either of the consoles especially by the fact that the most powerful console so far couldn't run BF4 in 1080p.

chef read before you post, fifa being identical doesn't count ?....

wasn't me who said that so not sure what your point is.



d21lewis on 01 December 2013
Panicnausia said:
d21lewis said:
Shinobi-san said:

I wasnt talking about all games. My post wasnt meant to be disingenuous.

At the beginning of the gen...360 multiplat games were superior to PS3 versions. Later on the difference became less of an issue. Atleast for the last two or three years most of digital foundry articles have either been a draw or a slight win to 360 and on the rare occasion a win to the PS3. And ive read just about every digital foundry article.

Even in the worst case scenario...a game like Bayonetta where the PS3 version was shit. There was never really a difference like we have now. Where games are running at almost double the res and in some cases with higher fps as well. Theoretically speaking we probably have the biggest discrepancies in power we have ever seen on consoles.

The GPU's in the consoles are simply in different classes. Thats why some games are running at double the res on PS4 so quickly. Its not because it cant be done on the X1 its just that its that easy to get it working on PS4. And why wouldnt it be? Its a glorified HD7860 (i made that up! but you should ge the point).

I kinda knew this was gonna happen though. PS fans were always going to blow a difference like this out of proportion and to follow it up MS fans would simply call bullshit. This just happens to be the one time where PS fans arent talking shit even if they are... -_-

Edit: Kinda went off track there but my point is that if you try the bolded...you will see the difference. It will be obvious. And if you play at a higher res all the time you wont go back. No one goes back.

Ever!?  I'm gonna leave this thread because tech stuff just isn't my forte but still.....ever??

Don't you remember the days when Nes versions of games had to be single player while Master System versions were two player because the Nes was just too weak?  Or when the Genesis version of games had no voices and missed half of the color or frames of animation of their Super Nes counterpart because, aside from the processor, the Genesis was so limited?  Or when, during the 6th gen, PS2 and Gamecube versions of games like Splinter Cell had to have the levels re-designed because the Xbox was so much more powerful (Yeah, people say it was a tie between the 'Cube and the Xbox but there were too many examples of the Gamecube version being short changed).

I think one version looking a little sharper than the other is virtually a non-existent gap in power.  When the Xbox One version of games start having less characters on screen or start missing effects, THEN we can talk.  As it stands, both versions of multi-plats on PS4/XBO offer the exact same experience barring any exclusivity deals.


They dont offer the same experience........Resolution is  a better experience and so is better performance.   If you dont care about graphics differences why are you posting in a thread about them?

 


Which is why I'm leaving.

*kisses you*

See ya later!



fatslob-:O on 01 December 2013
kirby007 said:
fatslob-:O said:
All of those games look worse on the X1 and there's no getting past around that. Early on this generation 1080p should be a standard for console gaming and the X1 fell short of it as well as the WII U. As a PC gamer I'm not impressed by either of the consoles especially by the fact that the most powerful console so far couldn't run BF4 in 1080p.

chef read before you post, fifa being identical doesn't count ?....

What about FIFA 14 ? I realize that some games achieve parity but overall the X1 will be cursed with a lower resolution because of it's ROPS and bandwidth limitation. 

How about a bet that Titanfall will be 720p on X1, eh ?



Shinobi-san on 01 December 2013
d21lewis said:
Shinobi-san said:

I wasnt talking about all games. My post wasnt meant to be disingenuous.

At the beginning of the gen...360 multiplat games were superior to PS3 versions. Later on the difference became less of an issue. Atleast for the last two or three years most of digital foundry articles have either been a draw or a slight win to 360 and on the rare occasion a win to the PS3. And ive read just about every digital foundry article.

Even in the worst case scenario...a game like Bayonetta where the PS3 version was shit. There was never really a difference like we have now. Where games are running at almost double the res and in some cases with higher fps as well. Theoretically speaking we probably have the biggest discrepancies in power we have ever seen on consoles.

The GPU's in the consoles are simply in different classes. Thats why some games are running at double the res on PS4 so quickly. Its not because it cant be done on the X1 its just that its that easy to get it working on PS4. And why wouldnt it be? Its a glorified HD7860 (i made that up! but you should ge the point).

I kinda knew this was gonna happen though. PS fans were always going to blow a difference like this out of proportion and to follow it up MS fans would simply call bullshit. This just happens to be the one time where PS fans arent talking shit even if they are... -_-

Edit: Kinda went off track there but my point is that if you try the bolded...you will see the difference. It will be obvious. And if you play at a higher res all the time you wont go back. No one goes back.

Ever!?  I'm gonna leave this thread because tech stuff just isn't my forte but still.....ever??

Don't you remember the days when Nes versions of games had to be single player while Master System versions were two player because the Nes was just too weak?  Or when the Genesis version of games had no voices and missed half of the color or frames of animation of their Super Nes counterpart because, aside from the processor, the Genesis was so limited?  Or when, during the 6th gen, PS2 and Gamecube versions of games like Splinter Cell had to have the levels re-designed because the Xbox was so much more powerful (Yeah, people say it was a tie between the 'Cube and the Xbox but there were too many examples of the Gamecube version being short changed).

I think one version looking a little sharper than the other is virtually a non-existent gap in power.  When the Xbox One version of games start having less characters on screen or start missing effects, THEN we can talk.  As it stands, both versions of multi-plats on PS4/XBO offer the exact same experience barring any exclusivity deals.


key word was theoretically

Edit: I guess i was being a bit too technical...power gap is very relative.

But yeah factually speaking we probably do have the biggest power difference in this gen. Going from wiiU to X1 to PS4.

Also the increase in performance doesnt really make that much of a difference these days...they can simply drop resolution or frames to keep the game the same experience. Which is what they did.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

kirby007 on 01 December 2013
fatslob-:O said:
kirby007 said:
fatslob-:O said:
All of those games look worse on the X1 and there's no getting past around that. Early on this generation 1080p should be a standard for console gaming and the X1 fell short of it as well as the WII U. As a PC gamer I'm not impressed by either of the consoles especially by the fact that the most powerful console so far couldn't run BF4 in 1080p.

chef read before you post, fifa being identical doesn't count ?....

What about FIFA 14 ? I realize that some games achieve parity but overall the X1 will be cursed with a lower resolution because of it's ROPS and bandwidth limitation. 

How about a bet that Titanfall will be 720p on X1, eh ?

If it will it will still look damn impressive



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.