Sony Announces the PlayStation 4 and the Death of Hardware(jim-silverman.com) |
Sony Announces the PlayStation 4 and the Death of Hardware(jim-silverman.com) |
Gamers may not care about hardware aesthetics (the original Xbox is a fat, ugly hunk of cheap plastic), but they sure as hell care about the technical aspects. E.g. Is it backwards compatible? Will it play used games? Can I take my save data to a friend's house? Can I replace the HDD if it fails or I run out of space? Etc.
Only one of those desires is about the hardware, and it's not central to the user experience.
But I agree - the hardware is very much alive, but it is moving to the background, no longer center stage.
a) its not finished, or
b) they're saving it for e3.
How this linkbaiter came to hardware is dead, fucked if I know.
The console manufacturers don't have any reason to copy each others aesthetics, because confusing branding doesn't help any of them, and there's no functional reason for them to all have the same shape/form factor.
You'll have two main variables to consider:
- which (or both) slightly differentiated but mostly-overlapping game library do you want access to
- do you want to give money to the company that installed spyware via music CDs, or the company that gave us IE6, Vista, and chair-throwing CEOs?
I think of every dollar I spend as a vote on the kind of future I want. Neither MS nor Sony get a dime from me these days.
I think it does, actually. It has little over 50% more GPU shading power, twice the pixel throughput, and more than twice the main ram throughput. The difference is just about enough to make sure that PS4 can run at twice the resolution (720p vs 1080p) or twice the frame rate compared to XBox next.
The fact that they both use very similar system architecture, with PS4 just having more of it, will mean that it will be easy for multiplatform titles to scale to the difference. I'm willing to bet money that once the MS specs are actually out, Sony will talk about the specs a lot.
From my reading, four of the shader units in the PS4 are reserved for Compute Units; things like physics (just cause 2) and lighting (battlefield 3), which cuts the raw advantage from 50% to 16%. Apparently on the 720, developers will be able to choose how to allocate compute units across the cores.
> twice the pixel throughput
Mainly useful for stereoscopic images or 4k. How many people have 4k tvs and 3D tvs? 16 render output units are plenty for 1080p (the PS4 has 32).
> twice the main ram throughput
At the cost of half the storage (4GB vs 8GB).
It's pretty much a tossup. Orbis is choosing different things to optimize compared to Durango. Textures will probably be able to be larger on Durango, while level loading will happen faster on the Orbis.
> with PS4 just having more of it
More of some things; less of others. Faster at some things; slower at others.
Either way, I'm not giving a dime to either of these evil companies.
They even gave more details specs later: http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2013/02/21/sony-announces-play...
Edit: This comment came off as more trolling than intended. My point is that it's fantastic that they're focusing on software and services. However, they're simultaneously indicating that software and services are to be disposed with along with the hardware. My hunch is that consumer expectations have moved on from this due to services such as the Apple App Store, Google Play Store, and to some extend Netflix and Rdio.
[1] http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/21/sony-psn-games-wont-trans...
As even games are now moving to the cloud, i wonder how much longer the computing power of your local device really matters. The quality of your internet connection is getting increasingly more important than your hardware.
Ok, what the article says is that nobody is going to care about the hardware. But if they want me to pay for it, I want to know what I'll get. I'm sure others feel the same.
Hardware is certainly not dead, especially if there is a box consumers will be going to best buy to pick up. Also, parent's will have no ability to remember whether they need a Playstation, Playstation 2, Playstation 360, Playstation wii, Playstation Nintendo, or Playstation 4. The hardware, at least it's appearance, will be heavily marketed.
It's things like the iPhone that you grip and handle to the point of becoming a fashion accessory that are fussed over the most.
With digital delivery, the requirement for touching the hardware becomes even less of an issue. For most people, apart from changing discs, the hardware itself is just a bother. The thing they interact with the most is the controller and the television it's connected with.
What they didn't show is the physical design, which is a good move because the device isn't launched until later. They'll be able to get in the news again when they show the design / launch the device.
I'm not saying the PS4 will have these issues, but we all hope it doesn't, and that's firmly in the hardware domain.
Have a PC/console die on you? Guess you'll be buying all new software.
What gives you that idea? Even on the Xbox 360, I own many games that are "on demand" (no physical disc) and I have them installed on multiple consoles as long as I'm logged into my Xbox Live account. I haven't heard Microsoft say that this would be changing.
http://www.develop-online.net/news/40383/Xbox-720-to-employ-...
You are reading bad sources. PS4 can allocate everything to graphics. And even if it couldn't, a lot of the graphics work in today's game engines is run as compute shaders anyway, so it would not matter in the slightest. The whole "cuts the raw advantage" spiel was concocted by fanboys to make themselves feel better. I strongly advocate that you pay no heed to anything said by anyone who mentions it.
> Mainly useful for stereoscopic images or 4k. How many people have 4k tvs and 3D tvs? 16 render output units are plenty for 1080p (the PS4 has 32).
Completely untrue. The load on rops doesn't depend on just resolution, but on what they draw. In deferred engines (which everyone uses now), you can often reduce load on other parts by storing intermediate results, spending more fillrate. On consoles, everyone designs their games to spend all the fillrate that is available.
Fillrate does, however scale linearly on resolution and frame rate, so if a game is designed to run on Xbox next at x resolution and y frame rate, to run at 2x or 2y you would need twice of it. Which is probably why Sony has exactly twice of it.
> At the cost of half the storage (4GB vs 8GB).
?!? What exactly are your sources anyway? PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5.
> Textures will probably be able to be larger on Durango
Umm, no. More memory means larger textures. The textures will be pretty much identical for the consoles.
> More of some things; less of others. Faster at some things; slower at others.
No, Orbis is strictly superior in everything. Which is my point.