Thanks. I learned something today.

I'd always assumed that both Xboxes ran off more or less a PC/DirectX architecture. I actually always thought that was kind of the point.

You aren't completely off, the Xbox, Xbox 360 and Dreamcast all used Direct3D, but there are numerous key differences.

I think a big part of the challenge was getting a game like Gears of War to run on 512mb ram (which from my understanding is the only reason it has 512mb, otherwise it would have been 256mb). There are a ton of custom commands and APIs at play that aren't readily available on other platforms.

Also, the original Xbox used a x86 architecture CPU, so the Xbox One is a bit of return to form, with the 360 being the odd one out.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that, Pentium III.

Which is why it was so utterly awesome once you modded it.

Yup. I had one that was basically a music keg and was also used for "purely legitimate" emulation purposes. Other devices have since served those purposes better, but at the time...

I think the only three games I ever had for it were the Halos and Riddick.

I guess that's why I was confused about the 360, and I guess it explains why the 360 wasn't backwards compatible with the OG Xbox.

What, too soon?

You bastard, my great-great grandfather died in that wreck. Welcome to my ignore list!

Change your name to UpperDecker so we can group people that ignore everybody together. It seems to be a two-term name thing.

This post is about as serious as yours.

MS Gamescon press conference is set for August 20th, one day before the show opens. Details of their indie games plan will be revealed.

http://www.polygon.com/2013/7/26/456...m-event-aug-20

Why does it seem like all X1 news posted here comes from polygon.com? I'd never even heard of them until a month ago.

polygon is a pretty new site (few years or so) but they are pretty damn respected.

Polygon : The Verge :: Joystiq : Engadget

All of the respected writers that used to be apart of Engadget, Joystiq, and the other tech blogs that got bought out by AOL ended up jumping ship, partnered with a new start-up (Vox Media) to create what ultimately became The Verge. Months after The Verge launched, they ended up creating a spin-off devoted specifically to gaming which turned into Polygon.

http://m.cnet.com/news/playstation-4...-ever/57595723

So yeah, I guess the console war isn't so much a war anymore, but simply a preference (as I knew it always would be). I knew Sony was hidding behind Microsoft's missteps for the last couple of months. Sony wanted to be seen as having the superior system, how, by not being Microsoft? Looks to me this strategy has just about run its course. I'm just glad the whole argument about the PS4 being more "powerful" is finally ending. Microsoft might be dumb at times, but hey, at least they've been more upfront about their new system.

Except for the fact that the GPU is still much more powerful than the Xbox One's, and that it's still GDDR5 vs DDR3. I don't see how much (if anything) has changed.

The GPU is more powerful? Got any proof to back up this claim?

GDDR5 is good for graphics cards, but doesn't do much for a CPU.

So yeah, it's a moot point. These systems are so similar it's not even funny.

It's really not about the hardware... it's all about the software.

That's where the XONE has the advantage. MS has the experience with Operating Systems (it's their own) and the tie-in's with other PC related products like software applications, etc. Plus, and maybe most importantly, DirectX allows developers to bring over their PC games in mind-numbingly easy fashion. Sony has to molest someone else's OS and developers have to deal with OpenGL.

Well hardware does matter..especially to gamers. I don't know too many PC Gamers who have software especially OS as their Number 1 priority....it's mainly about Power & Speed.

The trouble is both companys have more or less been forced into the situation of incorporating "Social Media" ...mainly MS...into their NexGen consoles. Thanks in part of the lets call it...IPad/IPhone GenerationSure...software is important but in general when gamers read over the specs of a system be it a console or pc...they're looking at the RAM, GPU, CPU, FPS, Bits, Bytes, Bandwidth, etc....There are people out there that don't even know the XO has three OS operating inside the XO for various functions let alone the name of the SONY base one.

Buyers of both systems will be fine considering when you look at the amount of RAM in the 360 and PS3...512mb of GDDR3 with the XO & PS4 having 4.5-5GB. We're making a "mountain out of a mole hill" out of all this.

Way to compare an open system (apples) to closed systems (coconuts).

Actually, OS possibly is the number 1 priority for PC gamers, it's just the decision is such a foregone conclusion that it doesn't even register.

If you're a serious PC gamer, you're going to be running Windows. People with OS X can run a few games natively, but even if a gamer goes with a Mac, they're likely going to run Windows on it for gaming, whether dual-boot, virtualized, or even emulated. And Linux is, currently, a distant 3rd in terms of OS for gaming.


However, I'm not sure gamers seriously consider OS on a console. DirectX may make porting some games from Windows to Xbox easier, but if there's demand for it, the developer is going to publish on PS3 as well. In fact, going with OpenGL may be an advantage if the developer is looking to publish crossplatform on PC (Both Windows and OS X, and even possibly Linux).

Techheads will quibble about the specs, but like with phone hardware, there's a point where to the average consumer the specs are "close enough" between products, especially when either are an upgrade to their existing hardware, and instead look at the overall package. They'll look at the features, the games, ease of use, what their friends have (for multiplayer), and of course price.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...ce-for-gamers/
Both the core count and TFLOP count are 50% higher on the PS4 than the Xbox One.

Sure, but if your decision was predicated on performance up until this point than lol @ you. I never expected a dramatic performance difference between the two, and if this was make or break for me I'd already be a PC gamer

The important aspect of the OS is beyond gaming. MS and Sony are going at this with different approaches. Sony seems to care mostly about hardcore gamers, while MS wants hardcore gamers AND wants to take over the living room.

The OS comes into play with how XONE will tie in with everything else - PC, phone, tablet, TV and even enterprise, plus more. DirectX isn't the only advantage. XONE is essentially a PC hooked up to everything with software compatible with what you're already running on your desktop.

MS is essentially targeting everyone.

OpenGL is not an advantage when one is porting games as PC games use DirectX. Linux and Mac use OpenCL and OpenGL, and well, that speaks for itself in the availability of titles.

Also, compare the performance of Valve games on the Mac OS (Linux excluded) to Windows. It's night and fucking day. Yet another reason why the XO has an advantage.

OpenGL is OS agnostic. You can literally use it on every single modern OS including handheld ones.

Also, don't blame performance issues with OpenGL (or a platform) due to the API, as it is even more advanced than Direct X 11.1 at this point. DX is old and crusty, thanks to Microsoft.