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

Forums - Gaming - Digital Foundry Face-Off: Dark Souls III (Xbox One vs. PS4)

MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016
LipeJJ said:
So, it looks like the PS4 version is very well done... I'm glad cause that's the version I'm getting.

Anyway, I just hope they maintain the fps stable throughout the entire journey, we don't want to across another Blighttown for sure.

Looks like they tied the physics to framerate, for the 4th time, they never learn...

Saw this on Reddit couple days back:

https://gfycat.com/HalfAnyFirefly (PS4 Japan version)



Around the Network
walsufnir on 27 March 2016
Skratchy said:
People say "well what's the big difference between 900 and 1080?"

Well, not a whole lot, if you are just in it for the sheer gameplay experience. But, if you have the option, why not pick the one the looks and runs smoother?

 

Because not everybody has a gaming pc.



Snoopy on 27 March 2016
walsufnir said:
Skratchy said:
People say "well what's the big difference between 900 and 1080?"

Well, not a whole lot, if you are just in it for the sheer gameplay experience. But, if you have the option, why not pick the one the looks and runs smoother?

 

Because not everybody has a gaming pc.

I love this line. Simply because when people trash xbox one console exclusives by saying "I'll just buy the pc version". Yet they will buy multiplats on the ps4.Anyways seems xbox one version runs well too.



MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016
Chazore said:
CGI-Quality said:

My point was that we have no idea what the specs will be, but for a PS4 to be 4K-ready (in a gaming sense), it will have to pack a considerable upgrade from the current model. The part about the PCs was just saying that there are different speced machines capable of this output. Whether it's $2000 or $5500.

Also, I'm guessing you know more than me regarding this new PS4. Where does it state what the absolute goal is?

Where does it state that they want very cheap 4k gaming?.

No really in the sane logical world, where are they going to give what PC users aren't already there for a way cheaper price and very optimal output?.

is 4k super cheap on PC these days?, if not then I honestly don't expect Sony to somehow single handedly wipe out every other tech manufacturer on the planet to create something that wipes out everything in terms of performance and native 4k gaming for £400 or less, I'm sorry but I just don't.

Kinda offtopic, but for Dark Souls 3 at 4K 30FPS minimum you would be looking at around 600-700$ PC depending how fancy you want your case and other parts to be.

So £400 for a PS4K is not that crazy if Sony gets a good deal with AMD

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($174.89 @ OutletPC) 

Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($42.98 @ Newegg) 

Memory: Kingston HyperX Fury Black 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR3-1866 Memory  ($33.88 @ OutletPC) 

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($48.85 @ OutletPC) 

Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 390 8GB Video Card  ($299.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  ($29.99 @ Newegg) 

Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($59.99 @ Newegg) 

Total: $690.57



walsufnir on 27 March 2016
CGI-Quality said:
walsufnir said:

Because not everybody has a gaming pc.

I wasn't aware that the PC version was tested here. :P

Of course it wasn't but the whole “my rig is better than yours“ is dumb because everybody knows which platform is truly the best. But at least it's “better than“ I guess. And we all know that for people who only own one console they are going to buy the game for the console they have.



Around the Network
MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016
CGI-Quality said:

Do not start this in here!

I'm sorry, but you are the one who started talking about your 5500$ rig.



Azzanation on 27 March 2016
JRPGfan said:

1080p vs 900p, higher shadow quality, better motion blurr, sharper image on HUD & Items... usually 3-4 fps ahead (more stable 30fps).

Nothing new... PS4 ahead as usual.


However game is still running so well you probably wouldnt notice if you didnt directly compare them side by side.
Its perfectly playable on the xbox one.

Well its as much as a suprise with PS4 to XB1 then it is with PC and Consoles. Honestly Dark Souls 3 is only 30 frames, im actually disapointed. I wont be buying it on consoles.



Chazore on 27 March 2016
CGI-Quality said:

I don't know - hence my continued inquisitions. :P

You're asking me as though you have a type of answer to give.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Ruler on 27 March 2016
foodfather said:
I'm still puzzled as to why these sorts of ''articles'' or ''analysis'' exists.

I have this blown up at aprox 129'' and I see no difference whatsoever.

Where were they in the PS2/xbox days, you know, when one version made the other version look like a last gen title and in some places effect the gameplay???

the PS2 and Xbox multiplats werent really that different. You had faster loading speed with Xbox dueto the HD, better AA and you had progressive scan support on most titles which made quite a difference. However progressive scan (480p) was removed from the PAL Xbox, while some PS2 games were officially released with 480p support in every region like Haunting Ground, Shadow of the Collossus and Residet Evil 4.

I remember german reviews did always point it out in every review how the PS2 game had worse aliasing issues. 

 

Both console can have progressive scan on PAL models but you have to unlock it which comes with own issues on each indevidual game on each console.



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Chazore on 27 March 2016
CGI-Quality said:

I only asked because you said: "You do realise they aren't aiming directly for 4k native gaming right?, it makes perfect sense to aim for photos and media which is more or less growing in the realm of media and photography than say gaming for consoles at 4k."

With that, I was under the impression that you knew something I didn't. 

And yet you want a written warrant of proof that Sony aren't definitely going to make a PS4k that is entirely focused on 4k native gaming, when I look at the market, the tech and the general logic let alone the fact that it would be sold at a loss, I just frankly don't see Sony creating something of a god particle out of nothing g(as in doing what no one on this planet could do at a cheaper price while having the same exact power output and not selling at a loss).It makes more sense to focus on 4k media and photos on their system which is also entering homes with tiny steps taken at a time, 4k for example on PC is taken at a personal level, I don't see 4k 60fps native console gaming hapening this gen, especially when the 1080p 60fps standard cannot be kept all around (talking 100%).



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.