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

Forums - Gaming - CEO Of R* Says PS4/XB1 Power Nowhere Near Realized Yet

Zekkyou on 01 June 2015
BluUltraSx said:
GameMasterPC said:
Well I think it will be hard for PS4 to ever surpass Driveclub's graphics, except that it may achieve those kind of graphics at 60fps.


GT7 will somoke those graphics rather easily.  Even if the hardware is easyas hell to code for, time will always improve things.

Assuming GT7 targets 1080p/60fps, it'll be hard pushed to even match DC's visuals, let alone "smoke those graphics rather easily". For that to be the case DC would need to be making use of less than half the PS4's potential capabilities, which seems rather unlikely.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 01 June 2015
torok said:
curl-6 said:

I don't think there will be huge improvement.

There's no crazy architecture with this gen's consoles, they're straightforward and easy to harness.

Of course, devs will get better at making the most of the hardware, but there won't be anywhere near the dramatic improvement we saw on PS3/360.

The 360 didn't had a crazy architecture, it was a normal GPU with a straightforward tri-core PPC CPU, with an unified RAM architecture. It also had similar visual improvements like the PS3 had.

Despite that, saying that a modern shader-based GPU is "easy to harness" isn't true. They are much more complicated than any fixed-function GPU used before the PS360 gen.

360's GPU used a unified lighting and shading system that devs at the time were not familiar with.

PS4/Xbone use off the shelf AMD parts, there's no hidden secrets to them. Any dev that hasn't been developing for consoles exclusively over the last few years will be familiar with how they work.

Hold out for PS3/360 levels of improvement if you wish, but I doubt it will happen.



curl-6 on 01 June 2015
torok said:
bigtakilla said:

Its called pre rendering.


So, realtime Beyond Two Souls for you.

The face is amazing, but those clothes, especially arounnd her shoulders, paid the price.



GameMasterPC on 02 June 2015
bigtakilla said:
GameMasterPC said:

You picked the wrong games for comparison. God Of War III is still one of the best looking games on PS3. If you really want to compare, compare it with an early PS3 game. There is a huge difference.

Just comparing the progression of a series that has multiple releases through a gen. I done Uncharted and GOW. It's fine if people feel this is a huge leap, it comes down to opinion anyways when considering a big leap, but if last gen didn't show it I doubt this gen will. 

You missed the point. You took GOW III as the base of what PS3 could achieve early in the gen, even though the game is one of the best looking PS3 games to date. So comparing one of the best looking PS3 games to another one of the best looking PS3 games obviously wouldn't show the leap in graphics. You don't always need to compare games in a particular series. Instead you should compare PS3 games in 2006 and 2013, then you'll see a huge difference.



bigtakilla on 02 June 2015
torok said:
bigtakilla said:

Just comparing the progression of a series that has multiple releases through a gen. I done Uncharted and GOW. It's fine if people feel this is a huge leap, it comes down to opinion anyways when considering a big leap, but if last gen didn't show it I doubt this gen will. 


GOW 3 is a 2010 game, 4 years after PS3 launched. It surely looks way better than early games, thanks for helping to prove my point! Either way, I think any graphics comparison that isn't on the Wii U won't make you happy.

Sure thing.



Around the Network
bigtakilla on 02 June 2015
GameMasterPC said:
bigtakilla said:

Just comparing the progression of a series that has multiple releases through a gen. I done Uncharted and GOW. It's fine if people feel this is a huge leap, it comes down to opinion anyways when considering a big leap, but if last gen didn't show it I doubt this gen will. 

You missed the point. You took GOW III as the base of what PS3 could achieve early in the gen, even though the game is one of the best looking PS3 games to date. So comparing one of the best looking PS3 games to another one of the best looking PS3 games obviously wouldn't show the leap in graphics. You don't always need to compare games in a particular series. Instead you should compare PS3 games in 2006 and 2013, then you'll see a huge difference.

I wasn't even the one who brought GOW up. Someone was trying to use Ascension and I was just comparing what they achieved in Ascension ot what the dev was able to achieve years earlier. But no, it doesn't show this huge leap forward as far as graphics are concerned.



curl-6 on 02 June 2015
bigtakilla said:

I wasn't even the one who brought GOW up. Someone was trying to use Ascension and I was just comparing what they achieved in Ascension ot what the dev was able to achieve years earlier. But no, it doesn't show this huge leap forward as far as graphics are concerned.

GOW may not be, but if you compare early PS3 with late-gen ones, there is a staggering difference, because the machine's crazy architecture meant that it tooks devs years to really learn how to get the most out of it.

Resistance: Fall of Man, 2006

 

Killzone 3, 2011

 

Now, I do not believe any of the current gen systems will show this kind of progress, but I must disagree with the assertion that PS3 did not show massive improvement.



bigtakilla on 02 June 2015
curl-6 said:
bigtakilla said:

I wasn't even the one who brought GOW up. Someone was trying to use Ascension and I was just comparing what they achieved in Ascension ot what the dev was able to achieve years earlier. But no, it doesn't show this huge leap forward as far as graphics are concerned.

GOW may not be, but if you compare early PS3 with late-gen ones, there is a staggering difference, because the machine's crazy architecture meant that it tooks devs years to really learn how to get the most out of it.

Resistance: Fall of Man, 2006

 

Killzone 3, 2011

 

Now, I do not believe any of the current gen systems will show this kind of progress, but I must disagree with the assertion that PS3 did not show massive improvement.

But the problem with comparing games that do not come from the same dev and series is it could easily be due to lack of budget/development time of a game as opposed to what a game early gen was capable of. We will have to disagree.

 

Take Star Ocean Vs Final Fantasy for example. One is clearly better graphically than the other, but SO was developed later than FF.



curl-6 on 02 June 2015
bigtakilla said:

But the problem with comparing games that do not come from the same dev and series is it could easily be due to lack of budget/development time of a game as opposed to what a game early gen was capable of. We will have to disagree.

Same dev and series then? OK.

Treyarch 2006

Treyarch 2012



Zekkyou on 02 June 2015
curl-6 said:

Treyarch 2006

[image]

Treyarch 2012

[image]

I think GTA makes for an even better comparison. Both were made by the same developer, both had ridiculously huge budgets, and both were years in the making.



More here: http://i.imgur.com/mdcFOZ3.jpg

The difference becomes even more dramatic when you consider that this is just a static graphics comparison. GTA5 also has much better effects and animations, and a much more 'alive' world.