Appears that remote play on Vita can be outside of the home and not only on the same WiFi network.
One day I hope to be excited about anything as much as people in commercials are excited about video games.
If you can in fact play ps4 games on your Vita outside your own wifi, it would be massive. I wonder if in this particular commercial it works because it's set in a college/university and there might be one standard wifi network?
This is also the first time we see the Sony Vita TV device. Sony is billing it as a way to play Vita on your TV, but they're oddly glossing over the biggest feature imo: it will let you play your ps4 on a different tv in your house. Sick days in bed would never be the same.
One day I hope to be excited about anything as much as people in commercials are excited about video games.
If you can in fact play ps4 games on your Vita outside your own wifi, it would be massive. I wonder if in this particular commercial it works because it's set in a college/university and there might be one standard wifi network?
This is also the first time we see the Sony Vita TV device. Sony is billing it as a way to play Vita on your TV, but they're oddly glossing over the biggest feature imo: it will let you play your ps4 on a different tv in your house. Sick days in bed would never be the same.
Even crazier is if the remote play function does truly work outside your own WiFi network they just built you a super portable PS4 connector that you could take to friends houses to hook up to their TV to play PS4.
Edit: Sony may have predicted this actually and blocked off that functionality for the Vita TV. If you freeze the video at 2:17 you will not see the PS4 remote play icon that you saw on the Vita available.
I do hope these changes in combo with the PS4 remote play get the Vita to take off though. I love that device from a hardware point of view but they do need to get a deeper install base to get some real AAA development for the system. Killzone and Borderlands 2 will be a good start.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 09-09-2013 at 02:04 PM.
Thus far this kind of navel-gazing stat-measuring contest seems to show numericaladvantages of 30 percent to 50 percent for the PlayStation 4 over the Xbox One in a number of important specs, such as GPU cores, control units, memory bandwidth, and teraflop shading.
The stat battle has gained renewed attention recently, though, now that Microsoft Director of Product Planning Albert Penello has waded in to defend the Xbox One from accusations of it being underpowered. "The performance delta between the two platforms is not as great as the raw numbers lead the average consumer to believe,"
Penello: "18 CUs [compute units] vs. 12 CUs =/= 50% more performance. Multi-core processors have inherent inefficiency with more CUs, so it's simply incorrect to say 50% more GPU." Ars: "The entire point of GPU workloads is that they scale basically perfectly, so 50% more cores is in fact 50% faster."
Penello: "Adding to that, each of our CUs is running 6% faster. It's not simply a 6% clock speed increase overall." Ars: "What the hell does that even mean?"
Penello: "We have more memory bandwidth. 176gb/sec is peak on paper for GDDR5. Our peak on paper is 272gb/sec. (68gb/sec DDR3 + 204gb/sec on ESRAM). ESRAM can do read/write cycles simultaneously so I see this number mis-quoted." Ars: "Just adding up bandwidth numbers is idiotic and meaningless. While the Xbox One's ESRAM is a little faster, we don't know how it's used, and the PS4's GDDR5 is obviously a lot bigger."
Penello: "We have at least 10% more CPU. Not only a faster processor, but a better audio chip also offloading CPU cycles." Ars: "Maybe true."
Penello: "We understand GPGPU [general processing on GPU] and its importance very well. Microsoft invented Direct Compute, and have been using GPGPU in a shipping product since 2010—it's called Kinect." Ars: "Who cares about the API? It really doesn't make much difference."
Penello: "Speaking of GPGPU—we have 3X the coherent bandwidth for GPGPU at 30gb/sec which significantly improves our ability for the CPU to efficiently read data generated by the GPU." Ars: "I don't know if that's even true."
We should have a poll on here:
- Getting an Xbox One
- Getting a PS4
- Was getting an Xbox One, but now getting PS4
- Was getting a PS4, but now getting Xbox One
- Buying both, why decide?
- Waiting till the dust settles
I am serious about this. Can we get a poll? Few of my friends play vids, so seeing what this (respected) community goes for would potentially sway my vote.
I was going to start a new topic for this, but figure I will just leave it here.
Edit: Thanks! I was an obvious xbone customer, but am now leaning to PS4 after the debacle and backpedaling.
Edit: Thanks! I was an obvious xbone customer, but am now leaning to PS4 after the debacle and backpedaling.
If you are not sure, I could see just waiting a little while being a reasonable way to go for some people.
To be bluntly honest, there isn't anything that is a MUST PLAY at launch. The games will still be there next year and the one after that. Most of the major releases in the next 6 months will be going to the existing platforms anyhow.
You'll be able to see how the two new systems work out (UI, games, performance, more/less backtracking, who knows, etc.) Hell, the first batch of games won't even take advantage of the hardware - remember the crappy original 360 and PS3 games? Kameo, Perfect Dark, Lair, etc.
I am really interested to see if the PS4 is indeed more powerful than the Xbone 180 in real world performance. And if Microsoft can justify the Kinect and the additional $100 burden (TV, TV, TV). Microsoft would love to do that soon rather than later - but I figure it will take a while/a lot more polish.
Help Microsoft? No idea. They're going to have to justify it to their consumers.
For example, I haven't really seen anything that convinces me about Kinect application. Certainly Kinect 2 is better relatively speaking but it's not like they don't have a massive install base already (probably close to 30 million units already) - and there isn't anything other than Dance Central.
After much reflection and deep thought, I've pre-ordered a PS4. Were I not such a devout Xbox fan the past 12 years, it wouldn't have been such a hard decision, but alas. I just can't get behind what Microsoft is trying to do this time around. I always knew that their eventual goal was to "take over the living room" so to speak, but between the constant reiterations of how it'll play TV, microwave your popcorn, bone your wife when you're away, etc. to it coming packed with that bloody (in my opinion) useless Kinect...I'm just not feeling it.
From my perspective, Sony did the right thing this time around with gearing their machine toward the more purist gamer. I'll hold on to my 360 for the foreseeable future and won't rule out an Xbone at some point down the road if it proves to be worthy, but there was just too much stacked against it this November to justify a commitment.
What? Why is there no PC master race upgrade option in the poll? lol
Speaking of PC master race, Steam is about to launch their family sharing system which is really exciting news. Can't wait to swap games with my buddy in Vancouver.
PlayStation 4 is currently around 50 per cent faster than its rival Xbox One. Multiple high-level game development sources have described the difference in performance between the consoles as “significant” and “obvious.”
Our contacts have told us that memory reads on PS4 are 40-50 per cent quicker than Xbox One, and its ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) is around 50 per cent faster. One basic example we were given suggested that without optimisation for either console, a platform-agnostic development build can run at around 30FPS in 1920×1080 on PS4, but it’ll run at “20-something” FPS in 1600×900 on Xbox One. “Xbox One is weaker and it’s a pain to use its ESRAM,” concluded one developer.
Microsoft is aware of the problem and, having recently upped the clock speed of Xbox One, is working hard to close the gap on PS4, though one developer we spoke to downplayed the move. “The clock speed update is not significant, it does not change things that much,” he said. “Of course, something is better than nothing.”
One source even suggested that enforcing parity across consoles could become a political issue between platform holders, developers and publishers. They said that it could damage perceptions of a cross platform title, not to mention Xbox One, if the PS4 version shipped with an obviously superior resolution and framerate; better to “castrate” the PS4 version and release near-identical games to avoid ruffling any feathers.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
Sony would be ####ing nuts to cripple their console, what with how poorly some of their other markets are performing.
I mean, have any other consoles ever been (proposed to be) nerfed like this? There's always been some disparity between consoles in every generation as far back as the Atari 2600.
