Microsoft: PS4 vs. Xbox One 1080p/60fps Differences "Pretty Minor"

[Alex Co]

Microsoft: PS4 vs. Xbox One 1080p/60fps Differences "Pretty Minor"

Microsoft director of product planning Albert Pennello claims technical differences between the PS4 and Xbox One "get way overblown."

If you haven't been keeping up with gaming news, much has been 1080p resolution and 60fps (frames-per-second) advantage [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/127785-Developers-Say-Memory-Is-Faster-on-PS4-Than-Xbox-One] PS4 games have compared to the Xbox One versions. While some people might think these discrepancies are a big deal, Microsoft director of product planning Albert Penello thinks these differences are being way "overblown," and are "pretty minor."


I think there were 12 titles released on both platforms [PS4 and Xbox One], and all but three of them had basically the same performance on both boxes. I think these little things get way overblown versus like the quality of the games and the real differences in the two experiences which are pretty minor.

If that wasn't enough, Penello adds that he knows what's going on "behind the scenes," has more info that most people don't have access to, and that some people people tend to neglect things that swing in his favor and highlight points that tell he's wrong.


Look, I've had a lot of time to think about this and I believe in what I said. I believe that the differences [between the PS4 and Xbox One] is not that great...And I know what is going behind the scenes and I have access to more information about some of this...than a lot of people. Sometimes I think people tend to neglect the points that are in my favor and they like to highlight the points that tell me that I am wrong. Right now, I still think Ryse is still the best looking game on any platform. Period. End of story.


You can read up on all the differences between the two next-gen consoles in The Escapist's massive PS4 vs. Xbox One comparison piece [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/hardware-reviews/10765-PS4-vs-Xbox-One-Comparison-Graphics-Specs-Differences] where it talks about the specs, launch libraries and so much more.

Do you agree with Penello and think the resolution and frame rate differences are being overblown, or is he wrong and these things will play a bigger factor once developers get more time with the consoles?

Source: GameSpot [http://www.gamertagradio.com/new/2014/01/episode-417-podcast-exclusive-interview-with-aaron-greenberg-albert-penello-about-xbox-one/]

Permalink

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Jim Sterling put it best, these groups pushed so hard on the Resolution angle that it's kinda funny to see it bite them in the ass so damn hard.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

I totally like his Appeal to Authority, who happens to be himself and his vast understanding of what goes on behind the scenes. You know, instead of just telling us why the difference is pretty minor...

 

[Legion]

Not that I particularly disagree, but the fact that it is the company with the weaker hardware saying it is kind of telling. I doubt he'd have made this statement if the Xbox was the stronger one.

 

[Therumancer]

I think it will matter in the long run, assuming of course developers bother to make the PS-4 versions of games fully exploit the hardware as opposed to simply doing the minimal effort for the "One" and then porting it to the PS-4 and simply have a game that doesn't fully exploit the hardware.

In the end though, we have pretty much garbage for "current gen" games on the market right now, so it's more or less irrelevant. All the fancy hardware in the world means absolutely nothing when you basically have nothing to do with it. What's more the 2014 release schedule is kind of dry, there are a few decent titles (Thief, The Evil Within, etc...) but not a whole lot coming, though I suppose there are a few shooters for those who are into that, still I honestly don't expect "Kill Zone" and "Titan Fall" to really carry these consoles for an entire year.

Also to be fair while I got the "PS4" it does seem the "One" has a slightly better set of releases coming, and honestly rather than "QQing" over how the hardware differences don't matter, the guys speaking for Microsoft should be pointing out that "yeah, you might have a more powerful system, but it's more likely to be gathering dust than ours because you have crap for games...". It might be a slight advantage but IMO it's the one you'd expect them to leverage.

 

[Eri]

Sorry but it's factual the PS4 is more powerful. Just get over it people. Even if it is minor (which it isn't for some titles).

 

[suitepee7]

of course he does, he works for microsoft...

but seriously, ryse the best looking on ANY platform? i think he may have forgotten PC gaming exists

 

[Rad Party God]

Meh, the Atari Jaguar boasted about having 64 bits in the early 90's.

In the end, I don't give a rat's ass about the raw processing power a system has, just give us a game that is truly "next gen" and I mean something that's simply not possible in previous hardware and I don't mean just prettier graphics (wich is highly debatable, I wouldn't mind if games keep looking like if they were made in 2008 and runs in 1080p and 60 fps).

Also, I highly doubt Ryse is the prettiest game in "any" platform, I also refuse to belive that's all they can do, linear corridors with QTE's, c'mon, we had plenty of those on the previous gen.

 

[Redhawkmillenium]

Ryse runs at 900p. It is objectively *worse* than things like Killzone which run on the PS4 at 1080p. Now you can argue that the art style is better for Ryse (a dubious argument, at that), but then you're talking about aesthetics, not graphics.

 

[fix-the-spade]

So, as more games are coming out and it's steadily becoming apparent that 1080p/60fps is not possible on Xbone where it is possible on PS4, Microsoft is suddenly and loudly declaring that it doesn't really matter anymore.

Given that system requirement are only going to go up from here and both boxes are based on PC architecture (so fewer PS3 style development quirks) it's hard to see the XBone's multi platform future being bright. For example I can't see Battlefront and Call of Duty: Whatever escaping without either visual cuts or (much worse for Microsoft) content being missing like Battlefield 3's hilariously tiny player cap on the 360/PS3. If the fidelity gap widens I can see that hurting Mixrosoft, having the more expensive less capable hardware is never a good position.

Titanfall Xbone vs Tintanfall PC could be interesting

 

[Jaeger_CDN]

of course he does, he works for microsoft...

but seriously, ryse the best looking on ANY platform? i think he may have forgotten PC gaming exists

Microsoft has been doing that ever since they started half ass started GFWL. They gave it a bit of lip service but pointed to the 360 as it's gaming platform of choice which is why the SteamOS (if Valve plays it's cards right) could possibly supplant Windows as the gaming platform for PC.


back on topic, if it was anyone other than someone from M$ saying that it might actually mean something but it's pretty rare for a company employee to slag their own recently released hardware

 

[Yopaz]

Not that I particularly disagree, but the fact that it is the company with the weaker hardware saying it is kind of telling. I doubt he'd have made this statement if the Xbox was the stronger one.

They have already used that card with the PS3 vs Xbox 360 bragging about how the 360 performed better in several games (Skyrim being the most obvious pick there) so you're completely right.

Ryse runs at 900p. It is objectively *worse* than things like Killzone which run on the PS4 at 1080p. Now you can argue that the art style is better for Ryse (a dubious argument, at that), but then you're talking about aesthetics, not graphics.

Resolution isn't about graphics either. It's about the number of independent pixels.

OT: Now I will admit that I agree that the resolution doesn't matter much to me, I keep as much a distance from the screen that I am unlikely to tell where I can see individual pixels even if it were running 720p, but the fps does matter. I want my games to run at a steady rate of 50+.

Also, one thing I always find to be hilarious. Microsoft launched their console with a third part exclusive zombie game running at 720p at 30 fps. Nintendo launched their console with a third party exclusive zombie game running at 1080p at 60 fps. It's debatable which game looked the best, but considering how they have been pushing resolution and fps only to see the Wii U managing what the Xbox One doesn't...

 

[Artemicion]

Pennello is well within his rights to be wrong. It doesn't much matter whether or not he can tell the differences between the Xbone and the PS4, or whether he thinks resolution and framerate are a big deal or not. From a purely technical standpoint, the PS4 is the superior hardware. As game devs become comfortable with the abilities and boundaries of these new consoles and can start pushing their limits, this will become much more clear.

As for the "framrate isn't a big deal" argument, visit this link [http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html] and the differences in framerate are clear as day. Take those bouncing blue boxes and then realize that they represent everything in a game and it's pretty obvious why 60FPS is important - especially on a big screen.

 

[teebeeohh]

this reminds of balancing discussion,
rock is OP, paper is fine
regards, scissor

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

1080p and 60fps is great but if the game is shit then it doesn't matter. I just want some good games and unfortunately neither the PS4/XB1 has any worth buying the hardware.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Sounds like bullshit "it really isn't that big of a deal, trust me, I'm an insider" to me.

Pretty much all the evidence so far points to the Xbone being significantly weaker then the PS4, with Tomb Raider DE being 60fps on the PS4 and 30fps on the Xbone. If you want to prove to us it isn't that big of a difference, fucking prove it instead of all this vague nonsense.

 

[Roxas1359]

I've always said this about framerate and screen resolution:
Resolution doesn't matter if the game is crap, and framerate is nice as long as it's stable. Nintendo, Sony and SEGA have managed to maintain frame rates pretty well I say, Lost World on the Wii U ran smoothly, but SE and other companies have had major frame rate problems before. Worst offenders of terrible frame rate are probably Bethesda to be honest.

 

[EndlessSporadic]

Except a real gamer, the ones who you are supposed to be targeting, know the difference and will tell you it REALLY does matter. 60fps input does not feel the same as 30fps input. Microsoft, you lost. Get over it. Die a slow death or wait for the next generation.