xbox "ONE"

[benok]

Stupid, not getting it... it's called ONE because it's an all-in-one system with TV as a major feature.

[Sava]

Purpose built machines will always beat general purpose machines, since the software can be far tighter. Not having to write code that supports all sorts of different graphics cards or OS variants means you can do a lot more low-level work that is very very fast. Also being able to use all of the cores - and exactly all of the cores - means you can write your threaded code really really efficiently. Knowing there will be precisely 8 cores means you can optimize for 8 cores - having 12 cores for code written for 8 is actually less efficient, unless the 12 cores are individually superior to the 8 cores.

You also have the fact that you have to make it support exactly 1080p, no higher. You're probably right that on your 25000x18000 monitor it looks nicer; but that comes at some processing cost that means the AA and whatnot is not quite as good, or the shadows aren't as complex. Writing for 1080p exactly (and 768p exactly) means they can optimize the **** out of it, especially since they know exactly how good the console is going to be at doing [whatever].

That's the tradeoff, and that's the difference between PC gaming and console gaming. A PC gamer and a Console gamer have roughly the same upgrade cycle, in that you need a new PC every 5-6 years if you are building top line; but a PC gamer has a sweet spot halfway through the console cycle, when he can upgrade his video card and have a superior experience for the second half of the console cycle, while having a better resolution experience the whole time.

Honestly at this point I find it all silly. PC gaming and Console gaming are both quite good experiences nowadays, and the worst-looking game on the XBox One will still be an amazing game, same as the worst looking (modern-AAA developed) game on your PC. Who the **** cares which is a tiny bit better? We're not talking Commodore 64 vs Atari here...

Once again, I find the need to correct you. The "next gen" consoles aren't out yet. Here is the type of gaming experience currently available to PC users.

http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/extremewindows/archive/2013/07/25/pushing-the-12k-pc-gaming-boundary-at-1-5-billion-pixels-per-second.aspx

Look at the screenshot of the 12k resolution. It's like the fricken Mars Rover pics. We're talking the equivalent of twelve 1080p screens. That's literally 12x better. At that resolution, tricks like anti-aliasing aren't even necessary. The machine runs on over 6000 cores and renders over a billion pixels a second. That's with current hardware. This cycle of consoles is coming up on 8 years. 8 years! Imagine the PC hardware available 8 years from now. By Moore's law, that's a doubling of specs a little more than 5 times. We're talking high end machines running capable of rendering more than ten billion pixels per second. It will be nearly indistinguishable from real life.

And though the guy here used $15k worth of displays, he used current PC hardware that is a current high-end build. I've already posted a PC Gamer article where they built a superior machine to both next-gen consoles for the cost of the PS4 (and $100 less than the xbox one, which is the most inferior spec'ed machine of the three). There's no bit of "optimization" that is going to make a slower machine better. I suspect PS4 and XB1 frame rates will be locked at 30hz. The $400 PC will likely exceed double that @1080p. Some games might even allow for 100+ fps on 120hz monitors. So we're not talking about a "tiny bit better". The consoles wouldn't even win a Pepsi challenge of frame rates.

And what are you talking about, "the shadows aren't as complex"? Where did you hear such nonsense? All the graphical assets are the same. It's the same shaders. The difference is, the settings on the PC can be cranked up.

There is no "trade-off" between PC gaming and consoles. PC gaming is superior. Period. It's a simple fact. It's easily demonstrable. Is this just some sort of elaborate troll on your part?

I have both an Xbox360 and PS3. I'll probably just get PS4. I like the machines. I like sitting in front of the big screen with a controller and just derping away. Also, the exclusive titles are fun. I just found both the Killzone and Resistance collections for PS3 for $60 on Amazon. That's six games total (or maybe seven).

I know I can be a condescending asshat. There's not much I can do about that. But you shouldn't dismiss facts just because they are coming from me.

And yes, the gaming experience on all the machines is awesome. Not everyone gets as much joy out of pushing the high-end PC gaming to it's limits. That's fine. There's no moral victory in being part of the PC gaming master race.

But c'mon man... don't let personal preference make you believe things that are demonstrably false!

Also, a lot of the next gen games shown off at E3 this year were being run off of PC's... if not all of it. So don't buy the whole "purpose-built machine" nonsense. Those machines are purpose-built to take away user control... not to fully optimize hardware.

[Asher]

I didn't read that post, because you've demonstrated no understanding of the issue in previous posts.

[Sava]

Good. I don't need to deal with an idiot fanboy response. Personally, I think you are just trolling with that nonsense. You work in IT/comp sci. You should know better. But I suppose brand loyalty does override reason.

You should at least check out the link. It's from windows.com for Pete's sack!

[Asher]

I'm certainly an idiot fanboy, what with my history of building and owning gaming PCs since I've been old enough to use them.

I also certainly wouldn't know anything about how software works either.

[Sava]

I know. That's why your irrational M$ love is so insane! You ought to know better.

[Sava]

Xbone: Beta tested in the future!

So when you get it, it's going to be buggy as fuck!