The fact that they both have AMD Jaguar APUs, on the other hand, could change that, since they're both essentially the same chip, as opposed to the ridiculous cell architecture Sony thought was a good idea last time around.Jadak said:That's not at all what any of this means... True, it will eliminate the shittiness in any ports that are shitty specifically because they are being ported to a 'lesser console' and thus have to be downgraded, but more often 'shittiness' is a consequence of attempting to overhaul the game to run in an environment other than the one it was designed and built for, and not spending the time/resources to do so to the same level of quality. Similar performance capabilities does not change that issue.RatherDull said:This is a very good thing!
No more ****ty ports!
I think what he meant, & I could be biased here since I had a similar assumption myself, is that it'll be quite a long time before latency is ever a non-issue with mo-cap gaming controls. A button press translating into an action in game is simple enough, as it's a dedicated & specific input for an action within that particular game; motion cameras like the Kinect have to detect your motion, map & calibrate it within a 3D space, interpret the input the player meant for that particular arm-flail to be (aka: the chief complaint people seemed to have with the Kinect 1), then perform the action on screen. Add to that the fact that pressing a button is just faster than swinging an arm or leaning in a particular direction, it'd take some serious tech to pull off zero latency, if it's even possible at all with present technologyBaldr said:I'm curious if he is talking about the Kinect 1 or the Kinect 2. By integrating the Kinect into the system, a lot of designers I've talked to said the Kinect 2 latency was a almost a non-issue now.
Until one version has mandatory Kinect and the other has no Kinect. Once again, whichever is the "main" system for that game will be better.DataSnake said:The fact that they both have AMD Jaguar APUs, on the other hand, could change that, since they're both essentially the same chip, as opposed to the ridiculous cell architecture Sony thought was a good idea last time around.Jadak said:That's not at all what any of this means... True, it will eliminate the shittiness in any ports that are shitty specifically because they are being ported to a 'lesser console' and thus have to be downgraded, but more often 'shittiness' is a consequence of attempting to overhaul the game to run in an environment other than the one it was designed and built for, and not spending the time/resources to do so to the same level of quality. Similar performance capabilities does not change that issue.RatherDull said:This is a very good thing!
No more ****ty ports!
There is always going to be latency, I don't imagine zero latency is possible. In terms of what Microsoft did on Kinect 2, is they upgraded the data speed. Kinect 1 ran on USB 2.0 protocols. Kinect 2 uses USB 3.0 speeds from what I understand. Kinect 1 ran the programming on top the OS, where as Kinect 2 calculations are integrated into one of the Operating Systems. Just these two things by themselves should really improve latency. However, Carmack may have a point when it comes to latency of the Kinect for use in online games. We really don't know the impact as there were not many Kinect games that were available to compete online.Zombie_Moogle said:I think what he meant, & I could be biased here since I had a similar assumption myself, is that it'll be quite a long time before latency is ever a non-issue with mo-cap gaming controls. A button press translating into an action in game is simple enough, as it's a dedicated & specific input for an action within that particular game; motion cameras like the Kinect have to detect your motion, map & calibrate it within a 3D space, interpret the input the player meant for that particular arm-flail to be (aka: the chief complaint people seemed to have with the Kinect 1), then perform the action on screen. Add to that the fact that pressing a button is just faster than swinging an arm or leaning in a particular direction, it'd take some serious tech to pull off zero latency, if it's even possible at all with present technologyBaldr said:I'm curious if he is talking about the Kinect 1 or the Kinect 2. By integrating the Kinect into the system, a lot of designers I've talked to said the Kinect 2 latency was a almost a non-issue now.
But then again, who knows? I guess we'll see when it comes out
So aside from the Cell juking games up beyond all reason... pretty much a repeat of 360 vs. PS3, then.Windu23 said:Not really. There were difference between the two in terms of graphics and some performance stuff. On the PS3, Capcom games, especially the fighters, have a slight but noticeable input lag, which can be a huge headache for tournament play. ME3 seems to crash a lot (at least mine does, and always in the same spots on multiple playthroughs), the multiplayer has constant issues, and there are games that just don't look as good, Bayonetta being the classic example.
If what Mr. Carmack is saying is true, then we should expect those issues to be eliminated. So, that will be a good thing. Let's hope it holds true.
The PS4 and the Xbox180 Are both using the same CPU and the same family of GPUs. The PS4 has also adopted the Xbox's shared memory architecture. There's very little environmental difference between the two now.Jadak said:That's not at all what any of this means... True, it will eliminate the shittiness in any ports that are shitty specifically because they are being ported to a 'lesser console' and thus have to be downgraded, but more often 'shittiness' is a consequence of attempting to overhaul the game to run in an environment other than the one it was designed and built for, and not spending the time/resources to do so to the same level of quality. Similar performance capabilities does not change that issue.
Except for the whole DDR3 RAM vs GDDR5 RAM. Not that that matters at all or anything. Psssst. It does.BloodSquirrel said:The PS4 and the Xbox180 Are both using the same CPU and the same family of GPUs. The PS4 has also adopted the Xbox's shared memory architecture. There's very little environmental difference between the two now.Jadak said:That's not at all what any of this means... True, it will eliminate the shittiness in any ports that are shitty specifically because they are being ported to a 'lesser console' and thus have to be downgraded, but more often 'shittiness' is a consequence of attempting to overhaul the game to run in an environment other than the one it was designed and built for, and not spending the time/resources to do so to the same level of quality. Similar performance capabilities does not change that issue.
Nah, if he did there would be a pudding reference before "whatnot".Morsomk said:...Did Bill Cosby like steal your keyboard or something?.Andy Chalk said:zigatexels, gigapoops, teragoogles and whatnot
This is my favourite description of Kinect, ever, of all time.Andy Chalk said:"Anybody working with a mouse really wants more buttons - [they're] helpful there. Kinect is sort of like a zero button mouse with a lot of latency on it."
Honestly? Most of the third party world is going to do with the Kinect what they already do with Nintendo Consoles. Ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist. The otherwise near identical nature of the two main consoles pretty much guarantees this. The XBox One and the PS4 are essentially running on the same hardware and architecture. There will be virtually no effort needed to port games between one and the other (or PC for that matter) except for coding for the few dedicated specialized console gimmicks. While the PS4's controller touchpad is pretty much a non issue (It's a mouse, the same as the PC versions use), the Kinect is going to find itself mostly ignored save on first party titles or exclusives.008Zulu said:This is my favourite description of Kinect, ever, of all time.Andy Chalk said:"Anybody working with a mouse really wants more buttons - [they're] helpful there. Kinect is sort of like a zero button mouse with a lot of latency on it."
I am curious about this whole thing however. Microsoft are really pushing Kinect with this console, but a lot of developers out there, especially indy devs (where this market seems to be heading), know that the majority of people hate Kinect. And therefore, will not be including it's functionality in their titles. So what's Microsoft's end game in making an easily re-gateable DRM console, with Windows 8 installed and a control mechanism very few use?