1. #441
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Actually you inserted yourself in the PS3 sales discussion and you just have a habit of always being w r o n g.
    It's not wrong when it's backed up by facts, facts that you provided new facts to prove the old facts wrong.

    It wasn't wrong at the time, it's wrong now, that's life.

    The silly part of this whole thing is, I wasn't even bringing up sales as a negative... it was a positive considering the PS3 had a one year shorter lifespan, but you want to sit here and defend something I wasn't even attacking.
    Last edited by Onikaroshi; 2019-04-27 at 01:59 AM.

  2. #442
    Also cool graph for anyone trying to hint the PS5 will be a failure:



    Playstation almost made as much money in just the last year as they did during the entire PS2 gen. That install base that is giving them boat loads of money ain't going anywhere with a fully BC PS5.

  3. #443
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    Quote Originally Posted by InTheEnd View Post
    People were saying the same thing when the Xbox X was released, "why spent $500 on a console when you can get a more powerful pc instead?" but they were wrong. When the Xbox X released, people could not match the price/performance of the console with an equivalent PC build. Now it seems people are making the same false assumption that they can get an equivalent or better PC build for $500 that matches or betters the features of the PS5. To them I say this, "you are dreaming!"
    The Xbox One to this day has nearly half the sales of the PS4, and one of the reasons is the initial $500 price which was because of the useless Kinect. I will say that the PS5 maybe too difficult for someone to match in price/performance with a PC build, even at $500. But, nobody expects the Intel Inquisition. Intel is cooking something with Kyle Bennett leaving to join them. Also, by the time the PS5 is released, we would have another year of prices dropping for hardware. No doubt the specs of the PS5 scare me as a PC gamer. The PS5 and probably the Xbox Two will not be like any other game console before it. Up to the PS5, every game console is basically built from mid or low end off the shelf hardware. This time the PS5 is built using a desktop 8 core Ryzen with a Navi 20... I assume since it can do Ray-Tracing and we know Navi 10 won't. Where as the PS4 uses the worst Jaguar 8 core running at a blistering 1.6Ghz and the equivalent to a mid range Radeon HD 7850 from 2012.

    I'm almost certain that the Xbox Two will be a clone of the PS5, but who will offer their console for $400 first? No console has been successful at $500, including the Xbox One.

  4. #444
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    Up to the PS5, every game console is basically built from mid or low end off the shelf hardware.
    Actually not true. Not sure about when going in the way way back machine but I can tell you the PS4/XBO gen was the first in awhile where new consoles launched that weren't competitive or better then high end PCs. The 360 was a monster in 2005, the PS3 even more so of one in 2006(albeit this shit had stupid hardware that took developers years to learn to properly code for negating it's initial advantage). Both where on par with high end gaming PCs at their release.

    If we go a gen further back from that which was started by the Dreamcast it literally shat on the entire existence of PC gaming at the time and was comparable to a model 3 which was the best gaming hardware that existed at the time. PCs caught up after a few years, then the OG Xbox launched and was basically a high end PC for it's time...

    So not really, been this way for one single gen in the last 3. Hard to compare shit prior to that as PC didn't really get console style games and most of their shit was euro jank.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2019-04-27 at 06:53 AM.

  5. #445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    The Xbox One to this day has nearly half the sales of the PS4, and one of the reasons is the initial $500 price which was because of the useless Kinect. I will say that the PS5 maybe too difficult for someone to match in price/performance with a PC build, even at $500. But, nobody expects the Intel Inquisition. Intel is cooking something with Kyle Bennett leaving to join them. Also, by the time the PS5 is released, we would have another year of prices dropping for hardware. No doubt the specs of the PS5 scare me as a PC gamer. The PS5 and probably the Xbox Two will not be like any other game console before it. Up to the PS5, every game console is basically built from mid or low end off the shelf hardware. This time the PS5 is built using a desktop 8 core Ryzen with a Navi 20... I assume since it can do Ray-Tracing and we know Navi 10 won't. Where as the PS4 uses the worst Jaguar 8 core running at a blistering 1.6Ghz and the equivalent to a mid range Radeon HD 7850 from 2012.

    I'm almost certain that the Xbox Two will be a clone of the PS5, but who will offer their console for $400 first? No console has been successful at $500, including the Xbox One.
    The thing is the Xbox One X's price was at relative cost of production; Microsoft didn't want to lose money on every console sold (understandably). With the PS5 appearing to have such beefy specs, Sony might not want to sell each console at a loss either and therefore might go with the ~$500 tag. I get that people who genuinely struggle and don't have much money to spare would prefer $400 over $500, but these consoles don't get made for nothing and I can understand them charging $500. I guess either company could afford to technically take the hit of a loss on every console sold, but it's a risk if their digital stores and game sales don't meet expectations.

  6. #446
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Actually not true. Not sure about when going in the way way back machine but I can tell you the PS4/XBO gen was the first in awhile where new consoles launched that weren't competitive or better then high end PCs. The 360 was a monster in 2005, the PS3 even more so of one in 2006(albeit this shit had stupid hardware that took developers years to learn to properly code for negating it's initial advantage). Both where on par with high end gaming PCs at their release.
    The GPU's maybe but not the CPU's or ram. I would say the PS3 had the better graphics because it didn't have to share VRAM with the CPU like the 360 did. But the 3Ghz PowerPC CPU's in those consoles were extremely weak as they didn't have out-of-order execution. Think of it like a 3Ghz Intel Atom as these chips had In-Order execution. The Spectre vulnerability doesn't effect these consoles due to not having good branch prediction. Then you have the 512MB of ram that sits in these machines, and the PS3 has 256MB for the CPU and 256MB for the GPU. Back in 2005/2006 it was common to have GPU's with that much memory.

    There's a reason why the Xbox One's 1.6Ghz Jaguar can emulate the Xbox 360's games which ran on a tri-core 3Ghz PowerPC. They were really weak.
    If we go a gen further back from that which was started by the Dreamcast it literally shat on the entire existence of PC gaming at the time and was comparable to a model 3 which was the best gaming hardware that existed at the time. PCs caught up after a few years, then the OG Xbox launched and was basically a high end PC for it's time...

    So not really, been this way for one single gen in the last 3. Hard to compare shit prior to that as PC didn't really get console style games and most of their shit was euro jank.
    The Deamcast I feel was a better console than the PS2 due specifically of the PowerVR GPU. The Dreamcast has more VRAM, has texture compression, and tile based rendering, which gave it sharper textures. But back in the late 90's and early 2000's PC gaming had its own renaissance since the hardware difference was so vast that PC got unique games that couldn't be available on console. Quake 3 is a good example as it was ported to PS2 and Dreamcast and while the game played alright it wasn't comparable to the PC version. Unreal Tournament was another game ported to PS2/DC/PC and again not comparable.

    It wasn't until the Original Xbox was released where titles like Half Life 2 and Doom 3 could be brought to a home console, and yes the original Xbox was that much more powerful than Dreamcast. The Xbox 360 and PS3 was the generation of game consoles where they actually used PC GPU's to power their graphics and allowed games such as American McGee's Alice to finally make its way to console, a game released in 2000 for PC.

    But none of this compares to what Sony is doing with the PS5. Sony doesn't want to compete with PC gaming as lately the sales of game titles on PC has been surpassing that of the Xbox One. So this time Sony is going all out on the PS5, and even at $500 I believe Sony will actually lose money for each PS5 sold. At $400 Sony would be taking a big loss but if released in 2020 the PS5 will have graphics performance that most PC gamers won't have, including Ray-Tracing. There is no $250 graphics card that can do Ray-Tracing right now, and probably won't be one next year. The PS5 would have a monopoly on Ray-Tracing for the mainstream.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by InTheEnd View Post
    The thing is the Xbox One X's price was at relative cost of production; Microsoft didn't want to lose money on every console sold (understandably). With the PS5 appearing to have such beefy specs, Sony might not want to sell each console at a loss either and therefore might go with the ~$500 tag. I get that people who genuinely struggle and don't have much money to spare would prefer $400 over $500, but these consoles don't get made for nothing and I can understand them charging $500. I guess either company could afford to technically take the hit of a loss on every console sold, but it's a risk if their digital stores and game sales don't meet expectations.
    Consumers don't care, they have overpriced rent to pay and stagnate wages to pay them with. Anything above $400 is not going to work for the PS5's success. People will just hold onto their PS4's and Xbox One's and wait for prices to drop, plus actually see games released.
    Last edited by Vash The Stampede; 2019-04-27 at 12:57 PM.

  7. #447
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    14,631
    Quote Originally Posted by Berthier View Post
    ill wait for stadia to play ps5 on my pc
    What makes you think Stadia will let you play PS5 games? 99% chance it won't. Sony just won't let it

  8. #448
    Quote Originally Posted by Berthier View Post
    ill wait for stadia to play ps5 on my pc
    This makes zero sense, Sony exclusives are not coming to Stadia.
    Check me out....Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing, Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing.
    My Gaming PC: MSI Trident 3 - i7-10700F - RTX 4060 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 1TB M.2SSD

  9. #449
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    The GPU's maybe but not the CPU's or ram.
    Please tell me how many gaming CPUs where tri core and 3.2 ghz in 2005. You are literally only talking about the last gen with this CPU non sense the 360 and PS3 both had monster CPUs as did most of the ones before them for their time. Also as far as memory is concerned 512MB was the recommended memory for high end setting of almost any game in 2005, and that's what the 360 and PS3 had without windows overheard eating up a bunch of it either. Hell, memory was the one aspect the PS4 wasn't really behind in either. 8 GB GDDR5 was really good in 2013.

    Also the fact you think Quake and UT on PC looked anywhere near as good as dreamcast games at the time is lmao status. Sonic Adventure, Shenmue, NFL and NBA2k, and all the model 3 arcade games make those games look like ass dude. Watch the DF retro video on shenmue if you want to know just how far behind PC gaming was at rendering while the dreamcast was king.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2019-04-27 at 07:47 PM.

  10. #450
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Please tell me how many gaming CPUs where tri core and 3.2 ghz in 2005. You are literally only talking about the last gen with this CPU non sense the 360 and PS3 both had monster CPUs as did most of the ones before them for their time. Also as far as memory is concerned 512MB was the recommended memory for high end setting of almost any game in 2005, and that's what the 360 and PS3 had without windows overheard eating up a bunch of it either. Hell, memory was the one aspect the PS4 wasn't really behind in either. 8 GB GDDR5 was really good in 2013.

    Also the fact you think Quake and UT on PC looked anywhere near as good as dreamcast games at the time is lmao status. Sonic Adventure, Shenmue, NFL and NBA2k, and all the model 3 arcade games make those games look like ass dude. Watch the DF retro video on shenmue if you want to know just how far behind PC gaming was at rendering while the dreamcast was king.
    Hell before the Dreamcast dropped the N64 was beating PC's in graphic's as well.
    Check me out....Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing, Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing.
    My Gaming PC: MSI Trident 3 - i7-10700F - RTX 4060 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 1TB M.2SSD

  11. #451
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Please tell me how many gaming CPUs where tri core and 3.2 ghz in 2005.
    Clock speeds don't matter and the PS3 had one PowerPC core. The key thing here to understand is that the Xbox One's 360 emulator does emulate the tri-core 3.2 Ghz CPU, and that's very telling. You see emulation requires at least 10x more processing power than the device you're trying to emulator, so Microsoft's 360 emulator runs a 3.2Ghz PowerPC core on a single 1.6Ghz Jaguar core. Which means the Xbox One's 1.6Ghz Jaguar core is at least ten times faster than the 3.2Ghz PowerPC in the Xbox 360. As for the PS3, well that was more of a joke since hardly anyone used the SPE's. In fact most games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 pretty much use one PowerPC core.

    You can actually see the PS3 CPU benchmarked against other CPU's. I believe the PS3 has two threads for the PowerPC core. People did get Linux running on these machines. This person even got the GPU working on the PS3.

    Also as far as memory is concerned 512MB was the recommended memory for high end setting of almost any game in 2005, and that's what the 360 and PS3 had without windows overheard eating up a bunch of it either. Hell, memory was the one aspect the PS4 wasn't really behind in either. 8 GB GDDR5 was really good in 2013.
    One of the biggest complaints from developers was the 360's and PS3's memory. Skyrim for the PS3 has issues with it's memory since half is dedicated to the GPU. The 8 GB of memory on the PS4 and Xbox One was a good call since a lot of gaming PC's today have that much memory as well. Also 2005 is more like 2006 since the console was released holiday season of 2005.
    Also the fact you think Quake and UT on PC looked anywhere near as good as dreamcast games at the time is lmao status. Sonic Adventure, Shenmue, NFL and NBA2k, and all the model 3 arcade games make those games look like ass dude. Watch the DF retro video on shenmue if you want to know just how far behind PC gaming was at rendering while the dreamcast was king.
    I don't want to turn this into a PC vs console debate as the mods here don't like that. So I'd rather just talk about the specs of the machines. I'm sure the mods are giving me the evil eye right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtbrig7390 View Post
    Hell before the Dreamcast dropped the N64 was beating PC's in graphic's as well.
    That is true, but PC gaming wasn't really a thing back then. Before the Voodoo graphics card a PC that could play games had a Sound Blaster 16 in it, with a port meant to plug in a controller.

  12. #452
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    Clock speeds don't matter and the PS3 had one PowerPC core. The key thing here to understand is that the Xbox One's 360 emulator does emulate the tri-core 3.2 Ghz CPU, and that's very telling. You see emulation requires at least 10x more processing power than the device you're trying to emulator, so Microsoft's 360 emulator runs a 3.2Ghz PowerPC core on a single 1.6Ghz Jaguar core.
    You honestly have no idea how Xbox One BC works. It doesn't emulate shit, it completely re compiles the games to run on the Xbox One hardware. This is why 360 discs are literally just DRM on Xbox One, they don't even install data as the complete 360 file of the game is worthless to the Xbox One. You have to download the Xbox One files from the servers. There is a reason games are slowly added to it over time, not just some magical "emulator" you think it is.

    On the PS3 front, claiming the cell processor was "1 core" is grade A lol worthy. Not sure if you're trying to get by on a technicality or just really don't understand the tech in it at all.

    Lastly on that regard you are talking about devs complaining about the memory in the 360/PS3 in literally 2011. 6 and 5 years after they came out, talk about a damn goal post shift, obviously after that period of time they have fallen well behind PC. At their launches in 2005/06 they where on par with high end gaming PCs, that is a fact.


    Also you are factually wrong on the dreamcast thing. It isn't a console vs pc thing, it's just a fact. Unreal looked an entire generation behind Shenmue at best(and I'm being generous because it actually looks like pure trash in comparison if I'm being honest). This video right here proves that. They literally compare it to PC games of the time if you're too lazy to watch, and the comparison is night and day.



    PC game rendering and tech didn't catch up to and surpass the dreamcast until a good 2 years after it's release.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2019-04-27 at 10:52 PM.

  13. #453
    of Horizon Zero Dawn sequel is one of their launch titles as rumored?... there is 75% chance that I will be unable to resist buying ps5 more or less at launch :/ unless the price is so outrageous that I won't be able to justify it to myself, until it goes on sale during holidays or something.

  14. #454
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    of Horizon Zero Dawn sequel is one of their launch titles as rumored?... there is 75% chance that I will be unable to resist buying ps5 more or less at launch :/ unless the price is so outrageous that I won't be able to justify it to myself, until it goes on sale during holidays or something.
    Guerilla's next game which is likely Horizon 2 will be at worst launch window if not an outright launch game. Their current schedule leaves then with 1 launch game and 1 mid gen game, like Killzone Shadowfall was a PS4 launch game and Horizon was mid gen. By time the PS5 launches it will be 3.5+ years since Horizon came out and Horizon came out 3.5 years after Killzone Shadowfall.

    Speaking of Sony's 1st party dev schedules if they can avoid their early gen mess ups like they had during PS4 the PS5 will end up with an even better lineup as crazy as that is. Uncharted 4 had to be scrapped and restarted, and SSM was working on a sci fi game that got cancelled. Without mess ups like that we literally get an extra ND and extra SSM game.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2019-04-28 at 12:38 AM.

  15. #455
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    Guerilla's next game which is likely Horizon 2 will be at worst launch window if not an outright launch game. Their current schedule leaves then with 1 launch game and 1 mid gen game, like Killzone Shadowfall was a PS4 launch game and Horizon was mid gen. By time the PS5 launches it will be 3.5+ years since Horizon came out and Horizon came out 3.5 years after Killzone Shadowfall.

    Speaking of Sony's 1st party dev schedules if they can avoid their early gen mess ups like they had during PS4 the PS5 will end up with an even better lineup as crazy as that is. Uncharted 4 had to be scrapped and restarted, and SSM was working on a sci fi game that got cancelled. Without mess ups like that we literally get an extra ND and extra SSM game.
    I fully expect a strong PS5 launch lineup even more so if the asking price of the system is higher ($500). They need to have a core reason to buy the PS5 and as much as I love BC that won't be it or can't be the only reason.

    So I fully expect Horizon 2 as the big title with smaller titles like Knack 3 and maybe even a couple new small IP's. Plus the added bonus of recent (at the time) releases like TLOU2 being playable at higher res/performance.
    Check me out....Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing, Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing.
    My Gaming PC: MSI Trident 3 - i7-10700F - RTX 4060 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 1TB M.2SSD

  16. #456
    well.... RIP my wallet.

    yes. i admit. I am THAT person that buys a console solely for specific exclusives.

  17. #457
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    You honestly have no idea how Xbox One BC works. It doesn't emulate shit, it completely re compiles the games to run on the Xbox One hardware. This is why 360 discs are literally just DRM on Xbox One, they don't even install data as the complete 360 file of the game is worthless to the Xbox One. You have to download the Xbox One files from the servers. There is a reason games are slowly added to it over time, not just some magical "emulator" you think it is.
    Modern emulators do this but you're still emulating the 3.2Ghz CPU and you're also doing it with a lot of overhead. I would imagine the difficulty for Microsoft to make a working emulator would require that each game have its own version of the emulator since PC authors of emulators don't always get every game working. They do but it takes a lot of time, which Microsoft doesn't have. Think of it like how Wine works on Linux where as great as Wine is one version breaks stuff but works well for one game while another version doesn't for this other game. What you're suggesting is that Microsoft remakes the game to work on the Xbox One, which is a huge undertaking and the effort would be better off porting the game and remastering it. A Dynamic Recompiler isn't anything new to emulation and has been around since the days of BLEEM, but the alternative is interpreter and that requires a lot more than 10x more performance. All modern emulators use a recompiler and still require a massive amount more processing power than the original machine. HLE or High Level Emulation can disable certain parts of the CPU to try to speed it up and that maybe another thing Microsoft is doing and requires hand tuning the emulator, which maybe the reason why nearly each Xbox 360 game gets it's own downloadable.

    Either way the Xbox One's 1.6Ghz X86 core's are at least 10x faster than the 3.2Ghz PowerPC cores in the Xbox 360. The GameCube, Wii, and Wii U PowerPC CPU's are more closer to what you'd find on a G4/G5 Mac back in the day, since it has Out-of-Order execution, and clock for clock they would destroy the PS3/360's In-Order ~3Ghz PowerPC CPU's. Don't be fooled by the high clock speed of the PS3/360 as even the PS5 will probably not be much higher in clock speed but would utterly decimate it in IPC.
    On the PS3 front, claiming the cell processor was "1 core" is grade A lol worthy. Not sure if you're trying to get by on a technicality or just really don't understand the tech in it at all.
    If you saw the video the guy did benchmark it and it was grade A lol worthy. He didn't use the SPE's which is the Cell's trump card, but they're too specialized to make good use of in a benchmark. Even Gabe Newell has expressed his hatred for how the PS3 works.
    Also you are factually wrong on the dreamcast thing. It isn't a console vs pc thing, it's just a fact. Unreal looked an entire generation behind Shenmue at best(and I'm being generous because it actually looks like pure trash in comparison if I'm being honest). This video right here proves that. They literally compare it to PC games of the time if you're too lazy to watch, and the comparison is night and day.



    PC game rendering and tech didn't catch up to and surpass the dreamcast until a good 2 years after it's release.
    Comparing Shenmue to Unreal isn't an apples to oranges comparison. Yes, Shenmue was graphically impressive but also it's a single player game and not multiplayer, hence you can go ham on textures and polygons in Shenmue. Unreal Tournament on Dreamcast compared to PC wasn't even close. So that's why I stick with games that have been ported on both the Dreamcast and PC. Also, we did have the Dreamcast GPU on PC, it was called PowerVR. It couldn't compete against the Geforce/TNT's or Radeons of that time, though I was impressed with its Tile Based Rendering technology. Which Nvidia might have added to their GPU's since Maxwell without disclosing it.

    But I'd argue that after the late 90's you don't buy a game console for the best graphics but to get an affordable gaming experience. While Sega did use hardware from their arcade machines, they're not the same exact hardware you got from their home console, and it shows. Anyway after the late 90's the console market has relied on cheap off the self hardware to make their consoles, and you can show me as many Shenmue's or whatever you want, but the fact is that game consoles were always behind in tech. Maybe a generation behind, many a few, but it was enough that the PC always looked different in graphics. The PS5 is the first console to throw that away and go high end. They're not using a cheap low performance CPU, and they're using a GPU that can do Ray-Tracing and one that's probably better than a RTX 2060, at least.

  18. #458
    Quote Originally Posted by Jtbrig7390 View Post
    I fully expect a strong PS5 launch lineup even more so if the asking price of the system is higher ($500). They need to have a core reason to buy the PS5 and as much as I love BC that won't be it or can't be the only reason.

    So I fully expect Horizon 2 as the big title with smaller titles like Knack 3 and maybe even a couple new small IP's. Plus the added bonus of recent (at the time) releases like TLOU2 being playable at higher res/performance.
    They will probably follow Horizon 2 with God of War: Thor's Electric Boogaloo within a year 1.5 years of launch. Year 3 is where I suspect they will be a true monster because I would expect a Spider-Man sequel and a new IP from Naughty Dog there.

    Japan Studio will probably have multiple projects out in that same time. I also Bluepoint's current remake project is likely a PS5 game at this rate, an exclusive one at that and will be out within the first 1.5 years or so.

    Also something I don't see mentioned much when people are too busy hyping up MS studio purchases(with nothing to show for it) there is now TWO Sony San Diego's, one makes MLB The Show and we don't actually know what the new studio there is working on yet, but they are led by ex Naughty Dog employees.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vash The Stampede View Post
    Modern emulators do this
    No they don't. Literally no emulator does this and what the Xbox One does is not emulation as the word is currently defined. Emulation is a form of reverse engineering, MS is literally taking the source code and re-doing it for those games and making it run native on the Xbox One. It's not emulation. MS literally has the equivalent of an entire AAA dev team working on this shit and you think it's emulation, comical.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2019-04-28 at 07:23 AM.

  19. #459
    Old God Vash The Stampede's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Better part of NJ
    Posts
    10,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    No they don't. Literally no emulator does this and what the Xbox One does is not emulation as the word is currently defined. Emulation is a form of reverse engineering, MS is literally taking the source code and re-doing it for those games and making it run native on the Xbox One. It's not emulation. MS literally has the equivalent of an entire AAA dev team working on this shit and you think it's emulation, comical.
    You're suggesting that Microsoft has the source code to every game they emulated on Xbox One? I could see legal problems with that, which is why that never happened. That also sounds like a port and not emulation. Sounds like to me you've watched Digital Foundry's Video which explains it poorly. All modern emulators since BLEEM including modern emulators give you an option to run it as Interpreter, which gives it more accuracy but runs extremely slow, and Dynamic Recompilation which is when you take an executable meant for one architecture like the PowerPC in the 360 and recompile it for another like x86 on the Xbox One. Modern emulators call it JIT Recompiler and they don't use any source code to do it. Even Java does it due to how Java works. But it is still slower than porting the game over and still requires 10x more processing power to do it.

    For example a certain PS3 emulator uses ahead-of-time LLVM recompiler but also uses ASMJIT recompiler for the SPE's. I believe the Xbox 360 emulator on the Xbox One uses a lot of ahead-of-time compilation's but that still requires a very fast CPU. So yea, LLVM recompilers are the new hot thing in emulation but I know a certain somebody who isn't even using a recompiler for his PS4 emulator and is instead making a Virtual Machine and thus bypassing the need to recompile any code. Sounds a lot like what Sony is doing with their PS4 backwards compatibility on the PS5.

    When it comes to console hardware choices, a lot of times certain hardware is used cause it looks good on paper. The Xbox 360's triple core 3.2Ghz CPU sounds impressive on paper but lacking out-of-order execution made it slow as molasses. There's a reason why Steve Jobs rejected Sony's Cell processor. The PS4's and Xbox One's 8 core 1.6Ghz was also chosen for looking good on paper, even though it would have been better to have 4 cores running at 3.2Ghz considering how hard it is for developers to work on multi-threaded code.

  20. #460

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •