AnandTech gave a ps4 vs. x1 hardware comparison

[Ayo]

Fixed console hardware vs. endlessly variable PC configurations

One of the most obvious and most important differences between console and PC development is that console hardware is fixed whereas PCs are very variable in what CPU, graphics hardware and memory they have. With console hardware being fixed and developers being covered by NDAs with the console manufacturers, developers will usually have much more direct hardware access and much more detailed information on the low level design of the hardware than on the PC.

Targeting a fixed, known hardware platform makes life easier for programmers in some respects. If the game runs well on the development kits then it should run just as well on every customer's box. This is in contrast to the PC where the different performance characteristics of different CPUs and graphics cards and the varying amounts and speeds of memory on different systems mean that developers must test many different configurations and provide options for performance scaling and sometimes entirely different code paths for different hardware.

On the other hand, in order to deliver the quality of experience consumers expect on a console, programmers must be comfortable with low level hardware details that developers on the PC don't have to deal with (even if sometimes they wish they could!). In order to compete with other titles on the market, console programmers will need intimate knowledge of the hardware at a level which is generally not even available to PC developers. Not every programmer on the team will need to be a low level hardware expert but a successful console team will need some programmers who are very knowledgeable about the hardware.

I'll have more to say about some of the specific technical implications of fixed console hardware in future posts.

Game Programming Lore: Differences between console and PC development, Part 1

It's like retardo land in this place sometimes.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

Another delusional PS Stan

Will you buy the ps4 first if they are the lead system for devs this gen?

I mean we already know all games will perform better on ps4.

 

[Ayo]

The best, meaning most financially sound, method for cross platform development. Is to carbon copy their game across all three platforms, using the lowest common denominator specification to ensure compatibility on all target platforms.

I said the most financially sound, not the one I liked.

People should note that high end development =/= PC development. A game can be designed to not push PC hardware, but still target PC as a platform in the way it is designed. Producing better results for PC than a console port. From my observations, console ports waste performance in a variety of ways that make no sense on PC; but help consoles.

For example using normal maps to detail a character, instead of putting the detail into the textures. Placing more stress on the GPUs shader units, when even a entry level gaming GPU has ample memory to support better than console textures.

Plus I'm sure some developers just cannot be bothered to move some of the effects consoles do on the CPU, over to the GPU in the PC version. Placing unnecessary workload on the CPU and leaving the GPU underutilized.

PC development vs Console development - GameSpot.com

I'm not the only one with this opinon. And this is the first time I'm googling any of this shyt.

Are you guys this fukking retarded on purpose? Or is it by mistake? Does visiting ArsTechinica.com once a day make you a programmer?

 

[Malta]

It's a different development process in the PC world. They have a bleeding edge mindset when they develop.

It's not the same for consoles. Everyone has the same specs on their particular platform.

Unfortunately the lowest common denominator gets all of the love.

LMAO!


What are you talking about, bleeding edge? PC games are developed with mid level systems in mind, the most widely sold GPU is the GTX 560 and that's what PC developers build their games around. There's one, maybe 2 developers out there that really put PC's through their paces, we're just now seeing DX11 games.

Developing for the bleeding egde if that were the case my PC hardware is basically a generation ahead of the PS4/One, but has only been pushed to it's limit once.

 

[Ayo]

Will you buy the ps4 first if they are the lead system for devs this gen?

Yes. I would have bought it first last time if it wasn't for it coming out later.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

care to elaborate and refute these points made by eurogamer?

But perhaps the most curious thing about the Xbox One reveal was the manner in which Microsoft's engineers - and Turn 10's Dan Greenawalt - referred to both "transistors in the box", and "transistors in the cloud", the inference being that Xbox One could evolve by offloading mathematical computations from the local hardware to the ginormous servers Microsoft is prepping for the new system's launch. There was talk of new worlds being generated in the cloud, and less latency-specific systems like physics and AI being processed outside of the console. It's true that this is an exciting prospect in terms of creating massively multiplayer open worlds where "next-gen" dedicated servers will be required to keep track of everything that's going on and feed that out to the gamers.

However, even the 20-30ms latency we tend to see on the raw exchange of data over the internet is an absolute lifetime in terms of rendering games locally plus of course there's the fact that any game embracing this won't work unless your internet connection is always on.We're certainly curious about how this particular facet of Xbox One gaming will evolve in the long term, but we weren't particularly convinced by the ideas set out by the panel - many which came across somewhat as wishful thinking thrown out there with no real exploration or real-life applications.

I said the power will be limited by Internet connections.

 

[Heretic]

All I know is that if ps4 and or mr somebody posts in a thread im leaving it immediately. Never seen more annoying digital dikksuckers than those 2. The rest of yall are good in my book, even the stans.

 

[daze23]

These dudes are only talking about graphics when they're bringing up cloud compute though, they're basically implying that there will be some massive graphics bump. It's just corny to see them keep posting these links without really knowing what it will affect.

it seems most claims were a response to this:

The cloud is going to work for storage and syncing info between platforms. The cloud isn't going to give one system more processing power......

it is more processing power. that's not to say Sony won't do something similar

 

[Ayo]

LMAO!


What are you talking about, bleeding edge? PC games are developed with mid level systems in mind, the most widely sold GPU is the GTX 560 and that's what PC developers build their games around. There's one, maybe 2 developers out there that really put PC's through their paces, we're just now seeing DX11 games.

Developing for the bleeding egde if that were the case my PC hardware is basically a generation ahead of the PS4/One, but has only been pushed to it's limit once.

Again, you're an idiot. Probably the biggest idiot I've encountered on The Coli. Someone who knows absolutely ZERO about the dev process. This guy explains it better than I could...

The best, meaning most financially sound, method for cross platform development. Is to carbon copy their game across all three platforms, using the lowest common denominator specification to ensure compatibility on all target platforms.

I said the most financially sound, not the one I liked.

People should note that high end development =/= PC development. A game can be designed to not push PC hardware, but still target PC as a platform in the way it is designed. Producing better results for PC than a console port. From my observations, console ports waste performance in a variety of ways that make no sense on PC; but help consoles.

For example using normal maps to detail a character, instead of putting the detail into the textures. Placing more stress on the GPUs shader units, when even a entry level gaming GPU has ample memory to support better than console textures.

Plus I'm sure some developers just cannot be bothered to move some of the effects consoles do on the CPU, over to the GPU in the PC version. Placing unnecessary workload on the CPU and leaving the GPU underutilized.

Having faster ram or more horsepower doesn't mean that a game is going to run better if the DEVS didn't take the time to develop in a way that takes advantage of that situation. Which is the case 99% of the time when the lowest common denominator is the platform of choice. DO YOU GET THAT?

 

[Mr. Somebody]

I dont think Sony can lose either way. If the games are ported down to Microsoft sony wins and if they are ported up, sony wins. Pc has shown how easy it is to make games look hotter when they are ported from xbox. They changed the architecture to make it easier to port and lead dev with..... With ps4 having that pc architecture.............. we really cant lose this gen.

 

[Malta]

Again, you're an idiot. Probably the biggest idiot I've encountered on The Coli. Someone who knows absolutely ZERO about the dev process. This guy explains it better than I could...

You're a moron, I don't need to let anyone else speak for me, because I'm not stupid. You're furiously searching google right now for support on your shytty argument, fukking clown. You said some bullshyt like PC games are developed with "bleeding edge" in mind, support your idiotic claim, I have a high end PC that I built myself do you?

Please, name all the "bleeding edge" PC developers, I'll start with one Crytek....now you name one. Added bonus, name all the games that only support DX11.

 

[daze23]

this was one of the Skate 3 devs explanation for why it was never ported:

redditor: Can you elaborate on why that is? I've never understood why porting seems to cause so many problems, at least from console to PC.

dev guy: For Skate the code was specifically for Xbox and PS3. It's lacking all the rendering layers for PC (ie. DirectX). It has no keyboard/mouse support in the UI, and since the UI wasn't using a middleware like Scaleform or something all that would have to be implemented. The list goes on.
If it had been made with a game engine that already supported PC, say Frostbite or Unreal, then a port would be pretty trivial.

 

[Ayo]

You're a moron, I don't need to let anyone else speak for me, because I'm not stupid. You're furiously searching google right now for support on your shytty argument, fukking clown. You said some bullshyt like PC games are developed with "bleeding edge" in mind, support your idiotic claim, I have a high end PC that I built myself do you?

Please, name all the "bleeding edge" PC developers, I'll start Crytek....now you name one. Added bonus, name all the games that only support DX11.

the fact remains that console devs are going to develop their games to take advantage of the xbox one's hardware and port that to the ps4. i've already proven that.

now you go on about your pc stuff.

 

[Rain]

What @Malta said about it being as easy as changing settings is true. There won't be any added effort for the devs to make better looking games on PS4. It'll honestly be inexcusable if the games don't look better

That's not to say the difference will be huge but it should be there.

 

[Malta]

the fact remains that console devs are going to develop their games to take advantage of the xbox one's hardware and port that to the ps4. i've already proven that.

now you go on about your pc stuff.

Oh, so now it's a "Fact" that they will develop on Xbox One, no dumbass they will develop for whichever has the higher userbase.

And PS4 mutliplat games will look better, only a moron would think otherwise, which explains why you're saying they won't.