The Big Bad Console Thread - Sway your Station with an Xboner !

Szlia · Feb 3, 2013

The iPhone is a bit of the exception and that may very well be the reason for its success, but the cell phone business model is more based on a flood of new models making it an absolute nightmare for software development, even worse than the PC and their bazillion potential configurations. Another big problem with cell phone is that the retail price for software is expected to be $0.99. The installed base is huge and impulse buys boosted by the low price, but success is also that much more volatile, so if you have a big budget game you are basically forced to also have a big budget advertisement campaign for it and hope your marketing team is good at its job or you will lose a LOT of money.

Big Phoenix · Feb 3, 2013

You think Sony/Microsoft want 10 year life cycles? I think none of you really understand just how far technology is advancing;

2005;

2012;

Youre kidding yourself if you think consoles with their enormous development cost and long life times can keep up.

Sulrn · Feb 4, 2013

Big Phoenix_sl said:
You think Sony/Microsoft want 10 year life cycles? I think none of you really understand just how far technology is advancing;
Youre kidding yourself if you think consoles with their enormous development cost and long life times can keep up.

They want to make a profit off any frontier they can speculate a return on investment.

I'd pay ~$400 for a product that ensured me standardized delivery of quality entertainment and increasing utility for 4+ years - as would many of the people on this board and abroad.

"Consoles" will always exist as long as the industry exists. The only thing potentially changing is the format of delivery. Even if we don't recognize it, there will be "consoles" providing an avenue of entertainment.

Noodleface · Feb 4, 2013

Big Phoenix_sl said:
You think Sony/Microsoft want 10 year life cycles? I think none of you really understand just how far technology is advancing;

2005;

2012;

Youre kidding yourself if you think consoles with their enormous development cost and long life times can keep up.

The problem with that Samsung is who the fuck wants that giant piece of shit? You can't even fit it into your pocket. When I saw it in the store I just laughed, why not have a regular phone (iphone even) and a tablet?

I still maintain the fact that they will hit a wall when it comes to thermal dissipation. Same thing happened with the CPU market and I guarantee it will happen in the smartphone market.. you can only go so far before you're holding a tablet up to your head to make phone calls.

chilansl · Feb 4, 2013

Noodleface_sl said:
The problem with that Samsung is who the fuck wants that giant piece of shit? You can't even fit it into your pocket. When I saw it in the store I just laughed, why not have a regular phone (iphone even) and a tablet?

I still maintain the fact that they will hit a wall when it comes to thermal dissipation. Same thing happened with the CPU market and I guarantee it will happen in the smartphone market.. you can only go so far before you're holding a tablet up to your head to make phone calls.

I am of two minds on this. On the one hand, I wanted a phone like Derek Zoolander (smaller than a 9V battery), and on the other hand, the only problem with my nexus 7 is that I can't put it to my ear and make phone calls...

Tuco · Feb 4, 2013

Gaming artists should really be commended for how many gamers think we're even close to flat returns on visual fidelity for more processing capability.

I can't wait until the next generation of consoles makes the current generation look like Xbox/PS2.

And the people who think that their shitty iphone is going to play modern AAA titles someday, lol. Give it a rest boys. Huge, hot and super-powerful gaming devices are here to stay.

As for the 4k resolutions, I'll have to see it to make a judgement, but I have to imagine that the benefit to going from 1080 pixel height to 3840 pixel width is low on sub-50" screens. For gaming purposes I imagine there's much more benefit to the increased proliferation of 3-monitor displays (and bezeless versions of these) as well as 120hz refresh rates.

All in all, people need to understand that exponential gains in processing power are matched in exponential gains in processing demand.

Noodleface_sl said:
The problem with that Samsung is who the fuck wants that giant piece of shit? You can't even fit it into your pocket. When I saw it in the store I just laughed, why not have a regular phone (iphone even) and a tablet?

I still maintain the fact that they will hit a wall when it comes to thermal dissipation. Same thing happened with the CPU market and I guarantee it will happen in the smartphone market.. you can only go so far before you're holding a tablet up to your head to make phone calls.

I don't know why you're assuming that computing power and thermal generation has an unbreakably linear relationship.

Foggy · Feb 4, 2013

4k won't catch on until mass entertainment can actually make it to the TV. Current cable doesn't even send 1080p so ya... we are a loooooooooooooong way off.

Sean_sl · Feb 4, 2013

4k is pure snake oil and irrelevant for your average sized TVs and regular viewing distances. Due to visual acuity and how our eyes work, etc, we just cannot perceive the extra resolution detail. Unless you have a massive projector screen it's pointless.

Tuco · Feb 4, 2013

I agree with the purpose of that graph but I think it's a little too aggressive where it states people can't notice differences. Then again I have 20/10 vision so I might be a little biased.

Sean_sl · Feb 4, 2013

Tuco_sl said:
I agree with the purpose of that graph but I think it's a little too aggressive where it states people can't notice differences. Then again I have 20/10 vision so I might be a little biased.

You would be highly biased. That graph is based off a normal human vision of 20/20. It's more or less accurate for your average person. 20/10 is what, twice as good as normal vision?

Fucking Tuco and his Super Eyes.

kegkilla · Feb 4, 2013

that graph is fucking dumb, people need to stop posting.

4k broadcasts will also have a wider color gamut and I think more audio channels.

Tuco · Feb 4, 2013

Sean_sl said:
You would be highly biased. That graph is based off a normal human vision of 20/20. It's more or less accurate for your average person. 20/10 is what, twice as good as normal vision?

Basically. I have no idea if that'd correspond to being able to perceive 720 vs 1080 at twice the distance or whatever.

Sean_sl · Feb 4, 2013

Grand Inquisitor Kegkilla_sl said:
that graph is fucking dumb, people need to stop posting.

4k broadcasts will also have a wider color gamut and I think more audio channels.

It's not dumb. It's fucking math and science that 4k is nonsense for regular sized TVs. You can also have a wider color gamut without going to 4k, that's purely in how you encode the video and has nothing to do with resolution.

Audio has also dick all to do with video resolution.

Noodleface · Feb 4, 2013

Tuco_sl said:
Gaming artists should really be commended for how many gamers think we're even close to flat returns on visual fidelity for more processing capability.

I can't wait until the next generation of consoles makes the current generation look like Xbox/PS2.

And the people who think that their shitty iphone is going to play modern AAA titles someday, lol. Give it a rest boys. Huge, hot and super-powerful gaming devices are here to stay.

As for the 4k resolutions, I'll have to see it to make a judgement, but I have to imagine that the benefit to going from 1080 pixel height to 3840 pixel width is low on sub-50" screens. For gaming purposes I imagine there's much more benefit to the increased proliferation of 3-monitor displays (and bezeless versions of these) as well as 120hz refresh rates.

All in all, people need to understand that exponential gains in processing power are matched in exponential gains in processing demand.

I don't know why you're assuming that computing power and thermal generation has an unbreakably linear relationship.

It's not unbreakably linear, especially as we explore multi-core solutions or perhaps optical computing solutions. Didn't we run into this with the iphone5 where the extra space was needed for the CPU?

Tuco · Feb 4, 2013

Noodleface_sl said:
It's not unbreakably linear, especially as we explore multi-core solutions or perhaps optical computing solutions. Didn't we run into this with the iphone5 where the extra space was needed for the CPU?

I agree with you then. And I have no idea about the iphone5. I do know that intel is targeting a sub-10nm process in this decade, which is incredible. Where they go after that in terms of density I have no idea.

Noodleface · Feb 4, 2013

Tuco_sl said:
I agree with you then. And I have no idea about the iphone5. I do know that intel is targeting a sub-10nm process in this decade, which is incredible. Where they go after that in terms of density I have no idea.

We have their internal roadmap here at work and even that is censored. I do know that they are definitely doing interesting things but if I shared any of it I'm sure I'd be arrested or assassinated.

Vorph · Feb 4, 2013

Sean_sl said:
4k is pure snake oil and irrelevant for your average sized TVs and regular viewing distances. Due to visual acuity and how our eyes work, etc, we just cannot perceive the extra resolution detail. Unless you have a massive projector screen it's pointless.

You're forgetting the other end of the spectrum. LG showed a 32" 4K display at CES this year. At a ~3' viewing distance (computer desk to chair) the difference between 1080p and 4K would be easily discernible.

Tuco · Feb 4, 2013

Vorph_sl said:
You're forgetting the other end of the spectrum. LG showed a 32" 4K display at CES this year. At a ~3' viewing distance (computer desk to chair) the difference between 1080p and 4K would be easily discernible.

This is the kind of thing I'd have to see to think was a big enough improvement to take the fps hit. There's already a huge difference in the resolution I'm able to run shit at and the incredibly low resolution of texture sizes available in games. I don't think it's obvious how bad texture sizes are in games until you play a game like Skyrim that has mods to give photo-realistic textures to the game.

People who don't know any better just sort of accept the left side of the image, but once you play a game like Crysis/Skyrim etc other games with less resolution textures and everything is ruined.

Vorph · Feb 4, 2013

I was speaking hypothetically, since we're talking consoles here and the PS4 will at best be able to play 4K blu-rays whenever they become available. Plus that LG panel is going to sell for at least $5000.

PC games on a current ~30" monitor would already be running at 2560x1600, so I tend to agree that 4K would only be a significant improvement if the panel itself was also of much higher quality. You would get more out of going up to 120Hz rather than increasing pixel density, imo.

Sean_sl · Feb 4, 2013

Vorph_sl said:
You're forgetting the other end of the spectrum. LG showed a 32" 4K display at CES this year. At a ~3' viewing distance (computer desk to chair) the difference between 1080p and 4K would be easily discernible.

Well yeah, I was talking about Televisions, not PC Monitors. 4k, which is dumb as fuck and should just be called 2180p or whatever, is definitely great for Monitors.

The Big Bad Console Thread - Sway your Station with an Xboner !

Member

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Deuces

A Mod Real Quick

Molten Core Raider

I got Tuco'd!

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

shitlord

I got Tuco'd!

shitlord

The Big Mod

I got Tuco'd!

shitlord

A Mod Real Quick

I got Tuco'd!

A Mod Real Quick

Bronze Baronet of the Realm

I got Tuco'd!

Bronze Baronet of the Realm

shitlord