Yeah but the mobile version only has to be a on 5-6 inch screen so aliasing doesn't matter as much. The home console version can run at 1080P with AA, it doesn't matter so much on a portable, you certainly don't need 1080P for a small portable screen, hell I find for resolution 960x540 on the Vita looks perfectly fine for image quality at that ballpark of screen size.
PowerVR already has the GT7900, that's even beyond the A9X, Nvidia likely will have the successor the Tegra X1 later this year too.
The A9X is used for iPads and they most certainly don't feature 5-6 inch screens ...
WITHOUT taking throttling into account the A9X has a lower perf at 1080p in the iPad Pro than the A9 at 540p in the iPhone 6s so the latter is arguably closer at been able to deliver console like graphics than former with comparable amount of perceived aliasing ...
And do you know why Apple isn't using the GT7900 ?
The Tegra X1 has already salvaged it's own transistor density gains and so I expect most of the improvement on it's successor to come from them using a FinFET structure. I give them a 50% better perf/wat at BEST ...
I'm just talking about a future Nintendo's handheld if they wanted a processor like that, they don't certainly need to use an iPad sized screen.
Apple isn't using the GT7900, that's a 16 core version of the product line, the A9X is a custom order 12 core. Actually PowerVR has said they could go even higher than that if a manufacturing vendor asked for it, there's just not much of a application need for it.
Im not. Both have exclusive franchises that are appealing to me. I have 11 Ps4 games right now, 5 are exclusives (Last of us remastered, Nathan Drake Collection, Bloodborne, Order 1886 and Until Dawn).
But those exclusives are nowhere near as POPULAR as nintendos franchises. Please learn the difference between POPULAR and my own personal preferences.
In terms of console game sales, sony and microsofts titles dont move much consoles. People are getting the playstation and xbox to play FIFA, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Battlefront, Grand theft Auto, The Elder scrolls, Witcher, Fallout, Destiny, Assassins Creed, Batman Arkham, Metal Gear Solid and co.
In the top 10 of playstation 4 titles (sales whise) there is just one single exclusive (The last of us remastered) on rank 9.
In the top 20 there are 2 playstation exclusive titles.
Now check Wii Us top titles.
Except for Fifa, if people was getting consoles for third parties they could get a pc instead. Yes, wii u's top 20 is dominated by Nintendo, but that doesn't change that most of the ones not Mario-related don't sell that much, without mentioning they have no competition there, unlike Sony and Ms on their consoles.
No Competition? Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, Batman, Mass Effect and co, also those games are available on the wii u.
People dont get an PC because its more expensive and not as easy to use.
Just because the graphic gap between gens is not as noticeable as before doesn't mean people will stop buying xbox/ps. And again, if they really cared about graphics they would be playing on pc, so no, they will keep being relevant (unless they stop selling consoles). The question is if Nintendo's gonna regain some market share with the nx
nope your saying graphics (animations, details and co are all graphics) and physics + co is game content and thats wrong. Not beeing able to show one single video about your points just prooves this.
good day.
Youre basicaly reducing the very engine of the game to "graphics". But anyways its clear this is an impossible conversaion, its like a scientist talking to a fervorous religious about evolution, the religious doesnt need to have any facts or know anything cause he believes he already has all the asnwer, therefore he debunks anything presented by the scientist with unfundamented belief, its like talking to a wall. Also what videos ? There are videos of TloU runing on PS3 everywhere, just google it. What I want to see is a video of a game runing physics, animations, contextual interactivity, AI, expressions and handling all these system together as well as TLoU does on a PS2, youre the one saying PS2 can do it, so plz show me PS2 doing it, with some technical breakdwon explaining exaclty whats going on there and why thats the same as TLoU.
This was my last reply to you, keep believing on "Noas Ark" cause as I said this is not a debate theres no argument coming from your side, a debate needs 2 sides presenting arguments, not 1 doing it and the other saing "show me video" or "send me a link".
Ps3 GOW 3 boss battle:
Ps2 Shadow os the colusses boss battle:
TLOU Ps3:
Silent Hill 3 ps2:
your welcome:
ps: your probl right, but your not the "scientist" ;)
Sorry I had to reply this was too funy, Im rolling in the floor laughting. Altough trying to compare Shadow of the Colossus to GOW3 Titan was kinda good, mechanicaly those fights are widly different, Cronus is a living scenario basic, Shadow of the Colossus is more analogus to what happens in Dragons Dogma combat albeit its way more clunky since you know PS2 was limited as fck when compared ot a PS3/X360.
To school you just a tiny bit Ill do a very small part of your work for you, this is a direct quote form a Santa Monica dev:
“Dynamic environments mean we can take literally anything in the game, including creatures or in this case, extremely large thousand foot plus creatures,” reveals Sony Santa Monica’s John Hight, “And turn them into an environment that Kratos can now navigate, battle on, find treasures.” The idea was mooted during God of War on PS2, but only PS3’s technology allowed the developers to build it. A similar technique was employed by Naughty Dog in Uncharted 2, but Hight claims GOW3’s approach is more advanced. “Ours is a soft body collision which allows us to take any organic character, and turn it into a level. We’ve been working on it for almost two years.”
Now the Silent HIll 3 trailer to say thats the same as TloU (wich you also linked a trailer that incidentaly doesnt actualy happen in game, wich makes things even funier) was pure comedy gold, theres an abyss of mechanics, systems, animations, AI so big between TloU and Silent Hill 3 (wich isnt even a good Silent Hill game) its not even funy. If your definition of what makes TloU what it is is it has cutscenes, than heck this game could be reproduced bit by bit on a Atari, would be totaly the same game. Youre either just playing your fervorous religious card again or never played either TloU or Silent HIll to understand just how retardedly far apart these 2 games are froma technical/technological standpoint.
From his logic Ocarina of time would be the same game and could be done on the SNES but would be sprite based and 2d or mario galaxy could have been done on the n64..... -_-
Im not a game dev so i cant be sure but to say that a game like the last of us could be done on PS2 and be the same game giving the same experience is ignorant.
Except for Fifa, if people was getting consoles for third parties they could get a pc instead. Yes, wii u's top 20 is dominated by Nintendo, but that doesn't change that most of the ones not Mario-related don't sell that much, without mentioning they have no competition there, unlike Sony and Ms on their consoles.
No Competition? Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, Batman, Mass Effect and co, also those games are available on the wii u.
People dont get an PC because its more expensive and not as easy to use.
Just because the graphic gap between gens is not as noticeable as before doesn't mean people will stop buying xbox/ps. And again, if they really cared about graphics they would be playing on pc, so no, they will keep being relevant (unless they stop selling consoles). The question is if Nintendo's gonna regain some market share with the nx
Those are not good examples lol.. How is AC competition when the first game they released on nintendo consoles was III I think? same for Batman; also Mass Effect was a late port. Cod... I mean most Nintendo gamers don't care about shooters, hence why they stopped releasing more of them on wii u.
What I would call competition is something like Rayman Legends, which if I recall correctly did even more than the ps3 version. So yeah what I said stands, Nintendo games have no competition on their consoles, for good or not. And I'm talking about the best third party games, not your annual cod/ac
So Nintendo is better than Sony and MS because Nintendo has a rabid fanbase that only plays Nintendo-made games and buys them like they didn't go out of style a decade ago, and Sony and MS's fanbases tend to support both first and third party games because gamers on platforms that actually have that option.
I'm pretty sure NES had a near monopoly of 3rd party support, yet Nintendo software still dominated.
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
elektranine said: Show me a game for smartphone that has even 20% the scope and graphics of a ps3 game like the last of us.
mobile games actually dont have as high budgets. Also the mobile industry is evolving faster. The iPhone 6s already is 4x as strong as the iPhone 5s. Still all games available run fine on the iphone 5s. Mobile games dont use the full potential of the modern hardware yet. Performance whise, an iphone 6s is stronger then an ps3.
Keep in mind this still uses the a7 chip (iphone 5s/ iPad air). And the game was also made to run on even less powerfull devices (like iPhone 4s which again is just 1/4 of the power on an iPhone 5s). The actual a9 chip is about 4 times as strong. So ~16x as strong as the hardware from the iPhone 4s, were this game also runs on. Mobiel technoligy is evolving fast.
Wow thanks for proving my point. Bioshock for iPhone came out years later and pails in comparison to even the xbox 360 version, much less being compared to a top tier ps3 exclusive. Smartphones are only now approaching Wii power levels. The PS5 will be out before mobile gpus can even come close to the ps3.
I'm also still waiting for you to show how smart tv's have PS4 graphics.
sonicfan1373 said: I would say that it is quite unlikely that your prediction will come to pass. I do not believe that the primary reason people are buying consoles right now is due to hardware power but rather I believe that content and marketing (I would put heavy emphasis on marketing) play a much bigger roll. Sony has done a fantastic job marketing their system to gamers and I cannot see them stopping in a few years even as graphical improvements become less noticeable. That does not mean that I do no believe Nintendo will be relevant, but I doubt they will have the last relevant console.
sony is verry very broke. They are a huge technical concern. They make smartphones, tvs, playstation, handhelds, pcs and much more. Still they are just worth 17 billion.
As an comparison. Nintendo have 18 billion cash just lying around. And they are only a gaming concern.
Ah yes, The ultimate fantasy. Sony is gonna go 'bankzrupt' .... aint gonna happen ever.
Lol sony is 'broke', they made nearly $1 billion last quarter. They have a market cap of over $28 billion and $35 billion in current assets, meanwhile Nintendo has a little over $9 billion in current assets and are worth about $17.6 billion. Do you just go around pulling numbers out of where the sun don't shine?
Hope is our greatest strength yet also biggest weakness. Just will not happen op, the game market has mostly moved past the experiences nintendo offers, a loyal fanbase it is but to small.
So Nintendo is better than Sony and MS because Nintendo has a rabid fanbase that only plays Nintendo-made games and buys them like they didn't go out of style a decade ago, and Sony and MS's fanbases tend to support both first and third party games because gamers on platforms that actually have that option.
I'm pretty sure NES had a near monopoly of 3rd party support, yet Nintendo software still dominated.
If you have to go back to before Sony and Microsoft even made video game consoles to try and prove a point about how Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft would compete without third party support, your point is probably pretty weak, especially considering the NES is 3 decades old.
elektranine said: Show me a game for smartphone that has even 20% the scope and graphics of a ps3 game like the last of us.
mobile games actually dont have as high budgets. Also the mobile industry is evolving faster. The iPhone 6s already is 4x as strong as the iPhone 5s. Still all games available run fine on the iphone 5s. Mobile games dont use the full potential of the modern hardware yet. Performance whise, an iphone 6s is stronger then an ps3.
Keep in mind this still uses the a7 chip (iphone 5s/ iPad air). And the game was also made to run on even less powerfull devices (like iPhone 4s which again is just 1/4 of the power on an iPhone 5s). The actual a9 chip is about 4 times as strong. So ~16x as strong as the hardware from the iPhone 4s, were this game also runs on. Mobiel technoligy is evolving fast.
Wow thanks for proving my point. Bioshock for iPhone came out years later and pails in comparison to even the xbox 360 version, much less being compared to a top tier ps3 exclusive. Smartphones are only now approaching Wii power levels. The PS5 will be out before mobile gpus can even come close to the ps3.
I'm also still waiting for you to show how smart tv's have PS4 graphics.
nope. iPhone 6s/iPad pro are way stronger then ps3 already.
The a9x chip from the iPad pro have better benchmark scores then the amd jaguar chip used in the ps4.
The graphical performance is increasing by the factor 2 every year. Bioshock on iPhone is still only iPhone 4s niveau. Looks already way better then wii graphics. Ps3 graphics were reached with iphone 5 or 5s. Now we are coming closer to nextgen graphical level.
