It’s time to whip out your framerate tickers and your favourite image zooming tool: the Xbox One X is around the corner and that means the industry at large is getting ready to split hairs. To be fair, this first comparison featuring Rise of the Tomb Raider puts in an impressive performance on Microsoft’s meaty new machine – but the addition of brand new assets absent in even the technically superior PC version makes the differences more pronounced.
So what’s the deal? Well, as expected, the Xbox One X’s beefier GPU is able to render Lara Croft’s latest at a higher resolution, resulting in a sharper overall picture – especially when you zoom in. This is because the PS4 Pro is using a checkerboard solution compared to a native 2160p output on Microsoft’s machine. Pretty much as expected, then.
The one comparison that’s getting a lot of mileage in the Twitter-sphere, however, shows a dramatic reduction in detail on Lara’s face in the PS4 Pro version of the game. Incidentally, these art assets are also absent from the PC edition of the title, suggesting that they’ve been created specifically for the Xbox One X. Now, the new console does have additional RAM meaning that it’s more likely to take advantage of higher resolution textures – but we’re not convinced many third-party publishers will be following in Square Enix’s footsteps here and commissioning the creation of brand new assets specifically for Microsoft's device.
Another point of comparison is the removal of depth of field in the Xbox One X edition. While this is likely to be a bug that will be fixed before the console’s launch, it does – in some scenes – give both the PS4 Pro and PC versions a softer look. This is intentional, of course, as the effect is designed to simulate camera focus in order to help characters or objects stand out of a scene.
So what have we learned from all this? Well, it’s still early days. As expected, the Xbox One X turns in a sharper image than the PS4 Pro due to its ability to hit a higher resolution – but it does require some degree of zooming if you want to play spot the difference. The most notable difference of all appears to rely on brand new art assets created specifically for Microsoft’s new machine, and the jury's still out on whether other developers will invest that degree of effort into the device.
[source eurogamer.net]
Comments 106
Looks great! Now all they need are some cool games and I'd be thinking about picking one up. Cuphead alone isn't quite going to do it for me!
I do worry though, MS really need to pull their finger out in that department, for all our sakes.
If; 12 months after pro came out; and at the price the x is launching at. I would be appalled if xbox didnt come out on top in comparisons tbh.
And Sony dont need to be worried in the slightest imo. At this stage of the generation, it is always going to be games that drive the vast majority of sales rather than pure horsepower - particularly since the x wont be getting exclusive titles over the standard xbone s. In the meantime, I will be looking forward to God of war, the last of us, spiderman, ni no kuni 2, yakuza 6, Ys 8, death stranding, detroit....
So the console that costs more and is a year later produces better results on ONE game? Shock horror. Apart from the tech nerds the system has no real incentive for a wider audience to purchase it after Christmas. Forza is just another Forza, Crackdown 3 isn't looking great, heck might even get cancelled knowing MS these days and Sea of Thieves and State of Decay just aren't system sellers.
@kyleforrester87 - Agreed. Make me feel like I'm missing out by not having an X-Box because right now I don't.
@Shepherd_Tallon Switch is probably the better option because it's already got a good line up of games (especially if you skipped Wii U) plus Mario and Metroid on the way too.
@Splat Yeah, I didn't have a 360 during the last gen but I always sort of wanted one. This time round theirs just.. nothing :/
The abosolute only reason i would ever consider getting a xbox 1 is for blu ray hd other than that its a waste of space for me, i dont see a single game on that console that makes me interested in it, all their exclusives look shocking.
Playstation had this right from day 1 of release of ps4 and I get a funny feeling come ps5 era they wont stop
Sony has nothing to worry about in the next 2 years with their Exclusives and until PS5 launches Fall 2019. Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, Knack 2, GT Sport, Days Gone, Detroit Become Human, Spider-Man, God of War 4, Dreams, MLB The Show, Yakuza 6, Shenmue 3, Wild, Death Stranding, The Last of Us 2 And Sucker Punches new IP which i heard is a Melee Combat Cyberpunk game. SPIDER-MAN isn't even First Party and will wipe the floor with Crackdown 3 Early 2018.😁😉😂😆😀😃🤣😅😊
I personally have never liked Digital Foundy as I honestly believe they exaggerate any problems with how games run or exaggerate the importance of differences between versions of games.
If you have to freezeframe a game, zoom in x10 or more and use software to pixel count then at that point I just think it's pointless.
In this instance, as in any of their other videos, the differences appear meaningful when under the microscope but the fact is, in motion and to the naked eye, the differences are negligible.
@Shepherd_Tallon Yeah it's like I said the other day that the Switch is a more compelling purchase since it looks like Nintendo are spreading their games out enough.
Of course the game is going to look better when they specifically add new assets to the model for the X version.
I still won't buy one, though. I still have an original Xbox One that I occasionally play Rare Replay and Gears on. Sucker collects more dust than anything.
I'm off back to Xbox for this because unfortunately the pro will be part payment.
Every Microsoft console I end up buying, I end up getting rid of. So I stopped buying them.
@Lovespuds I'm glad someone said it. I agree!
I think the quality of the work they do is outstanding, and I appeciate there is an audience for it, but you're bang on: if you have to freeze the frame and zoom in then it's like... 🤔
And for the record, I said the same about the comparisons with the Xbox One and PS3 when they were "worse off".
@MadAussieBloke Don't bother, it's not great.
@Lovespuds @get2sammyb DF do great work IMO. I do get what you're saying, though. But overall the benefits of their quality work outweigh any negatives.
@kyleforrester87 plus you can play cuphead on pc.
@MadAussieBloke and ignore @get2sammyb opinion on this game In my opinion it's better than Uncharted 4
@StaffyDog Cya
@Shepherd_Tallon Defo Switch, on top of having one of the best games this year already, they've already announced plenty of quality exclusives to come and being able to play all of these games on the go is just fantastic.
I still haven't even docked my Switch and I've had it from the launch because handheld mode is so good.
@Bad-MuthaAdebisi ikr im selling mine today
PS4 looks better cause hair longer. K thnx bye.
But in true honesty, who the f*ck cares? They're both cash grab .5 systems that add little reason to invest in them if you already own the base console.
@MadAussieBloke I just love shooting folks in the head with my bow and arrow
I don't see a difference.ps4 pro look better
@playstation1995 Odd! Just have faith that 4K native with higher quality assets will look better than the Pro version
Like @kyleforrester87 I also enjoyed my playthrough of Rise Of The Tomb Raider more than Uncharted 4. Both very good games.
@Lovespuds Well, that's the point, isn't it? Pointing out all the differences, no matter how small they are. I think everyone knows that the more you have to zoom in to see the differences, the less noticeable they are in motion.
Zooming in I can see a touch more crispness but that's it. These are still shots, when the games in motion and actually being played, the difference won't really be noticeable. Kudos to MS for making a beast of a machine, but what it renders at, how many teraflops it has, how much ram it has, none of that will matter if there is nothing to play. They are in desperate need of a system seller. This is strictly for those who have to have the absolute newest tech and has disposable income, I know because I used to be that guy that had to have every new console. That being said, I'm glad MS did this. It's stiffer competition and it will hopefully for Sony to continue their amazing run and keep cranking out unbelievable games to stay ahead.
While there is clearly a difference between the 2 is it enough to impact anyone's enjoyment of the game? It doesn't really seem like it.
@playstation1995 how does it look better if you don't see a difference?
The original Xbox was three times more powerful than the PS2. Didn't stop Sony from dominating in the market.
The newest Xbox can have the ability to create porn stars out of thin air for all I care - as long as it doesn't have exclusive games (or at least, games which make use of the ability to create porn stars), all the technical mumbo jumbo mean jack ship.
I still stay why would I want to spend 500.00 for a system that only do run 3rd party games slight better. No matter what MS does to try to stay in the market at the end of the day Sony and nintendo will always have more, variety, better exclusives games than MS. The X might have a hot starts because of the holidays but I'll been seen a lots of those used X at my nearest GameStop stores after year in the market
This is what I expected most likely unless Poorly optimized or say Sony comes in and wants the Pro/PS4 ver of a game to look better than the XbOX... somehow (it's possible cus $$$ talks)
If it's not the PC ver it's prob gonna be the XbOX ver that looks/runs the best on certain games due to the extra horsepower if Devs want to but the one issue is the Xbox One S and parity if devs wanna respect everyone ofc cus the S is more powerful than Switch but not up to the power of a regular PS4.
XbOX has the capability of doing more games in True 4K than PS4 Pro due to this power but doesn't have enough power to do ALL games in True 4K some still must be checkerboarded and upscaled to 4K from 1440p-1800p. The chip in the XbOX is the equivalent of a Nividia GeForce GTX 1070 Graphics Card and that card can do 4K on a good amount of games but unlike the Nividia GeForce GTX 1080 TI which can do 4K 60fps.
@kyleforrester87
Hey buddy, I don't wish to give the impression that I do not respect the skill of the people at DF, they are clearly very intelligent people.
My point is though, they used to be in the business of comparing graphics cards and processors and so on, but once they realised the traffic they could generate through comparisons between MS and Sony they exploited it and that is pretty much all they do now.
As a result, in order to justify their content they NEED to find these differences and overstate there relevance as they know there is a rabid section of the community ready to use this information against the platform they don't like.
It's $400 2016 console vs $500 2017 console, of course the later will have better graphics. Rise of the tomb raider is the gold standard of ps4 pro upgrade because crystal dynamics know how to optimize, so I'm not surprised it have better graphics on more powerfull machine.
I don't think many third party games will follow crystal dynamics example though.
Yeah, there's an advantage there, but there probably won't be many XBOX games that do much more than a resolution upscale, the same thing happened with the Pro; Tomb Raider went the extra mile with the upgrades and options, but most games just simply run at higher res.
@slimcrowder the screenshot looks better on the pro.and video also
Stills are irrelevant, it's how the gane is in motion, which DF have a hard time of showing as you can't really replicate it on a laptop/phone screen. The differences are about the same as base PS4 to PS4 Pro so god knows how DF made a full article about it!
@MadAussieBloke Ummmm yeah, Rise of the Tomb Raider is a fantastic game, don't listen to Sammy on this one. If you like the first one, this one is superior in every way, and for me, it was a better, more replayable game than Uncharted 4 will ever be. If you own it, you're doing yourself a disservice not playing it.
In terms of these comparisons, I just recently picked up an X1S on sale, mainly for the 4K Blu Ray. I'm not buying their X1X, especially considering all of their first party games will be available on PC. Liking my PS4 Pro so far, although the HDR is producing several very strange color problems, and i usually keep it turned off.
@Shepherd_Tallon
Splatoon will be new to you as well so yes, Switch all the way.
These graphical comparisons do nothing for me. My PS4 vanilla has a ton of great games so no need for any of the beefier HD twins for me.
I am really surprised that this site opted to cover this. Of course the XB1X is going to be significantly better and the extra RAM allows it to handle and stream in 4k assets, textures etc. The Pro only has the same amount of RAM as the PS4 and XB1 and why it opts to upscale HD textures instead. The XB1 has 9GB RAM allocated just to gaming - that's more than the Pro has in its entirety. The RAM is also 50% faster too. For every 2GB of RAM the XB1X has, the Pro at the bandwidth it has would need 3GB to keep up. If the Pro had 6GB allocated to gaming, the XB1X would need just 4GB to keep up but the Pro nly has 5.5GB for gaming compared to the 9GB in the X
Then of course there is that GPU difference - 40% may not sound like much but that's an entire PS4 on top of what the Pro can offer. This is probably why Rise of the Tomb Raider runs natively at 4k - that and maybe the DX12 modification. What is much more interesting though is the High Quality settings mode - a mode that only runs at 1080p on Pro, yet runs at a CB4k - albeit using a slightly different way of Checkerboarding but its still similar to Pro's highest resolution mode - then of course the XB1X adds high visual settings and uses 4k assets.
I know 'fanboys' are going to make excuses or try and put down the XB1X version for whatever reason - I am still waiting for the 'power but no games' comment when the X has at least 100 games that will be enhanced...
As for creating and adding textures etc specially for the 'X', that's BS because ALL these textures etc are already made for PC's to access - all they have to do is port those over!! The amount of RAM the XB1X has can cope easily with the higher quality assets - even most GPU's only need 8GB for 4k Assets on PC's. As for will developers bother to push the 'X' and deliver the 'best' console version, of course they will - just like they have for the PS4 for the previous 4years. You didn't get games from EA, Activision etc all at the same resolution and visual settings as the XB1 - you got 1080p with the best visual setting the 'extra' in the GPU offered on PS4 - regardless of who had the marketing or exclusivity rights.
To say the 'difference' between the Pro and XB1X is the same as the PS4 to XB1 is also BS. At least the XB1 had the better CPU for a start and the same amount of RAM with ESRAM too (not sure how that helped) but in some games, the extra CPU power was enough to return a higher frame rate.
I have said all along the Pro is NOT a 4k machine - its a 'half' step up at best. The difference in textures in the video above has been leveled at the Pro since Day 1 with DF Comparing to a PC. Now the XB1X can use the same assets as a 4k high-end PC, those differences were ALWAYS going to be evident - this video just confirms what I have been saying for the last year or more.
That doesn't mean the Pro is 'bad' but its, as I have always said, a PS4 with an extra GPU bolted on it - a minor step up that at best allows for a boost in resolution but without improving the RAM etc they were always going to be making an enhanced PS4 with a half step into the 4k market.
Its still going to be the best place to play all the PS Exclusives - no way am I getting rid of my Pro. However for the closest to full 4k experience that a console can offer, the XB1X is definitely the best. As people who know will know, this is exactly what I have been saying all along and maybe why I really do think Sony will be looking to bring out its PS5 sooner rather than later - a console built for the 4k Era - not a half step up into 1440p territory...
EDIT: Lets not forget that both 1st Party exclusives and 3rd Party multi-platform games are also built to run at 4k with 4k assets, textures etc for PC's. Instead of devs having to scale these all down for consoles (inc PS4), they can keep a lot of those assets/settings for XB1X. This is why games like Gears 4, Forza H3, Rise of the Tomb Raider and probably every enhanced game going forward will be utilising the quality Assets that devs built for PC market. Like I said earlier, devs will probably want to put out the best they can - just like they have for the previous 4yrs that Sony has had the edge. You didn't get a PS4 version 'nerfed' to XB1 levels so why think the XB1X will be nerfed because of Pro???
@BAMozzy - I was waiting for your 1000 word essay on the matter.
Joking. Great break down as always.
I really thought the graphical arms race was reaching its natural ceiling, but...
Turns out I had NO idea.
When it gets some games which interest me I'll consider It, enhancing old games doesn't bother me at all. If I'm honest I find this 4K race pointless as the games aren't getting any better, I think I've had more fun with Sonic Mania than any other game this year
@Splat LMAO - wouldn't be me otherwise...
This may be what's needed to show why Sony need a PS5 - it doesn't mean that the PS4 is 'instantly' dead as there is always a 2-3yr cross-over period. I know I would prefer to play games like Days Gone and Last of Us 2 at full 4k with full 4k assets. We know Days Gone is using the CB 4k method - like the excellent Horizon:ZD does but I wouldn't be surprised if Last of Us 2 is only 1440p - both Uncharted 4 and the Lost Legacy are 1440p...
I wonder how many here have actually watched the video's or looked at the Pics on a full 4k screen? I watched the DF video on my 4k TV and the difference is much more obvious than on my 1440p Laptop screen...
@Lovespuds This is why I'm not a massive graphics freak. Stuff like this is hard for me to notice unless I'm actively looking for it, and even then, it's too small for me to appreciate. Not having a TV that can show the difference doesn't help, but I don't have any incentive to buy one of those right now.
Good for Xbox, the strongest console! I'm not too convinced to get it just to see some extra dirt on people's faces, hands and clothes though... In any case I wish them some good sales and the best of luck.
I personally would be worried for Microsoft if these kind of comparisons didn't show the Xb1x being better than the Pro. I mean, that is the point of this console existing right?
I think it will do well in the short term, and it looks like a great bit of kit. It isn't something that interests me, firstly because with my setup, I am not going to get the top tier results and secondly I have no reason to buy an XB1. My favourite game so far this gen (that I have played) have largely been PS or PS console exclusives. There is nothing, sadly, on the XB that has me salivating.
I do wonder how much cash MS is throwing to devs to upscale their games. ROTR looks like it had had a pretty solid makeover.
I cant say i'm surprised by this, considering the processing power advantage among other things.
Barring Nintendo, who obviously do things their own way, This is arguably good for PS owners. MS put some extra effort in to bringing the X with those specs as it stands, so it will (should) inspire Sony when they start to dev their next hardware
I dont particularly want an X, having switched over after the fat Xbox and 360, for starters i dont own a 4k screen and am happy with what i have, however for those buying one, enjoy, hope it gives exactly what ya want.. And overall it can only be a plus point in the future development of consoles
Oh good lord who gives a flying tit?!?! Having to zoom in and in and in to see a difference does not a good game make. Spectrum vs Commadore, st vs amiga, Nintendo vs sega etc etc, we've seen this of kind of rivalry for the past 40 years. Who cares? If a games good, then it's good regardless how 'sharp' the graphics are. Bored of these type of comparisons.
I did not buy a pro as I really did not see the point. The new xbox is only a £100 more so glad I waited. Looking forward to the launch very much and can finally play a lot of the xbox games I have never played.
The only natural response will be for Sony to release a PS4 Pro-and-a-half within two years.
@StaffyDog
No staffy don't leave us alone. We are just 60 million.
Just kiddin if you want a Xboxx one xx just buy it. You ll lose not us. Enjoy a remastered remaster of a remaster in true 4k definition. Oh and cupcake em cuphead.
@carlos82 i agree a lot of modern games have been disappointing me although some i have really loved but more often than not they have been disappointing, i have found myself having more fun with older games honestly
developers are concentrating on how pretty they can make a game look instead of making a game that is engaging and fun
in my opinion we don't need more powerful consoles at least not yet we just need more care put into the games
The Xbox One X isn't going to be the game changer some people thought it would be. I personally don't care about the amount of pixels or resolution. I have Uncharted 4 on my normal PS4, and I've never thought for a second I should upgrade. I also have Horizon: Zero Dawn, and it is a gorgeous game, but in my opinion, I think Breath of the Wild is far more gorgeous, even on the Wii U. I care less about realism, and more about art style. Games are about escapism, so who needs realistic graphics? Take the L, Microsoft.
@stupidget
Console wars are completely dumb......but don't you ever mention Atari ST in the same breath as Amiga 😂😂😂
Nothing special that my naked eyes can see.
Who cares? PS4 Slim will outsell PS4 Pro and XXbone combined.
Anyone saying you cant tell the difference is mental.
On my 156 inch interstellar screen you can see lara crofts nipples if you squint with your face on the glass.
@StaffyDog awww dont go.
Im staying with my pro for the foreseeable but the x1x does have a great pitch now. All 3 generations games and the most powerful console.
I'm sorry guys I have to go but maybe I come back in the future
@FullbringIchigo
That has a lot to do with the design of this generations consoles. The fact that there is a big imbalance between GPU ad CPU is affecting the direction that developers are being pushed into. To a degree, the same is happening in the PC market too - the GPU's have evolved at a much higher rate than the CPU's that, again,' these are weighted much more in favour of GPU over CPU's.
The GPU is responsible for making games look as stunning as they do - increasing the resolution and visual effects way beyond what was achievable before. CPU's may be responsible for instructing the GPU but also have to deal with AI and NPC's, calculate where everything in the world is - inc destructive elements, shots and hit detection - not just between you and 1 other character but often multiples.
Devs have tried to push these limits - as games like Just Cause 3 (big explosions and physics) and Assassin's Creed (lots of NPC's and AI) tried to do but often hit CPU limits hard and resulted in poor performance.
Last gen, the CPU's were 'cutting edge' at the time. Sony's was significantly better than the XB360's but the GPU's weren't particularly special at the time. The PS3 was technically weaker (GPU and RAM configuration) and trying to get the 'most' out of the CPU, with the split RAM configuration affected the multi-platform devs with porting games to it but first party studio's could really use the full potential as they were building games specifically to that configuration.
When you look at the specs of the current gen, the CPU is definitely the weakest area - especially when we look at the Pro/XB1X. Both Sony and MS have opted to keep with the same 8core 'Jaguar' CPU - a CPU designed for mobile technology. When both Sony and MS brought us their iterative upgrade - the overall tweak to CPU is in the order of around a 30% boost to speed - not counting any of the modification that MS has done to offload some of that workload as its 'difficult' to assess. However when you then look at the improvements to the GPU with Sony not only doubling the size but also increasing the speed to get a 2.3x (compared to the CPU's 1.3x) and MS increasing their GPU by 4.3-4.6x (XB1s is slightly better so only gives a 4.3x improvement compared o the weaker OG unit). As you can see, with both opting to boost GPU by a factor of 2.3-4.6x compared to just the 1.3x boost to CPU - thus increasing the 'imbalance' to favour the GPU. Its understandable considering the primary reason for the Pro and 'X' was to boost the 'visuals' only for the 4k TV's.
An increase in CPU though 'could' have seen the boost to frame rates that we all hoped for. It also could have delivered a 'change' in direction for games too - more AI (not just people or enemies, but even vehicles when racing for example), more NPC's, more enemies - although I am still amazed at the amount of enemies Days Gone has achieved - amazing - maybe their AI is 'basic' but its still a big achievement. I know Dead Rising can have a high number of slow moving AI that amble towards you, not a 'swarm' of Zombies moving at speed and reacting to environmental hazards/obstacles... Also the CPU can improve physics, destruction etc etc too.
Maybe if Sony do opt for a 'big' CPU with their inevitable PS5 - at least 'big' in terms of performance - multi threaded, highly efficient CPU - a 4core version of Ryzen for example can beat an 8core Jaguar - even if clocked the same - because of multi threading and better efficiency. - just imagine what a 6 core Ryzen at 3ghz could bring...
I was surprised that MS opted not to add fp16 support to their XB1X. Whilst a whole game is unlikely to use fp16 in every instruction, the fact that a dev can cut some instructions in half does mean that the GPU can process double the instructions than if they were 'full fp32'. This would give GPU's a theoretical 8.4tflop (PS4 Pro) to 12tflop (X) performance. The fact Sony's PS4 Pro can, should help close the gap in some areas to the 'X'. Whether many Devs will use this, who knows. Its not as if many GPU's are capable of handling half instructions so the incentive to use it will be limited. Good to see Codemasters though using some fp16 to improve their new F1 game.
Another area I think MS missed out on was the object tracking that really helps improve CB rendering accuracy. For Sony, the image tracking means that when CB is used, it tracks the objects to ensure it lines up better with the new frame to try and ensure that the right pixels are used to fill in the checkerboard gaps. These two aspects, fp16 and object tracking, shows that Sony were looking to more to delivering enhanced visuals on a limited budget. This may explain why they were 'confident' that Devs should be targeting 1800p+ and not 1440p or below from a GPU that is essentially a 'decent' 1440p GPU on PC's. Even DF were surprised to see how a weakened RX480 (as this basically is) actually delivers a 'decent' 4k image - inc the Rise of the Tomb Raider CB 4k render. I myself was impressed too by this and Horizon:ZD but I could also see that 'softness' in textures that often stood out against the sharpness of the edges etc. DF were of the opinion that the Pro should target 1440p at most because of their experience of the RX480.
I know how good the Pro is and I am not replacing it just because I am buying an X. However an X is still a 'bigger' boost than the PS4 was compared to the XB1 and should show that difference clearly on a 4k screen. For 1080p TV owners, the difference may not be so apparent between a super sampled Pro or X image so unless frame rates are better (something that RotTR may offer in its 60fps mode - will have to see by how much when it releases and DF can test it in the most taxing areas), then the Pro may make more sense if you want to play Sony's exclusives more than MS's. It makes more sense for XB1 owners though as a lot of games will struggle to offer full HD. No doubt a game like AC: O or SW: BF2 will be 900p or less on base XB1's, (maybe on PS4 too) so the X or Pro could be a good way to play these at 1080p (or above) on console.
It looks a bit better, since it's a new console, it better be able to make games look better considering the specs, but it's not a huge leap in graphics like some were hyping it.
Good for the Xbox crowd though.
The difference is minuscule. There is no point in getting one release over the other.
And you'll probably need a £1000+ 4k TV to see it on... anyways more powerful machine in better graphics shock. These comparison articles are gonna get real old, real quick.
God, 79 comments for this? We're in the wrong business.
Yawn... Meanwhile, the Switch is dominating. Wake me up when PS5 is revealed.
@EVIL-C Is it?
@BAMozzy No one will care if The Last of us 2 is 1440p, as long as the game's great it won't matter, just like every game that's ever existed.
Like I said before Sony don't need PS5 for a good long while, not when they have top exclusives to sell (they sure as heck won't launch on both platforms together) and the X won't change that cos like some have said "if you want to play xbox games at high resolutions then get a PC instead" even then both products are still expensive. My nephews car cost less then a X.
This graphics arms race is getting old. It's gotten to the point where you can barely see a difference from upgrades anymore, and yet we're still getting mid-generation consoles made purely for better visuals. You would think we're back in the days of people upgrading from the SNES to the N64.
Besides, people who truly care about graphics enough to buy a Pro or X should just shell out a few hundred extra dollars and buy a PC.
@get2sammyb What did you expect Sammy? You knew it would create such interest - especially on a PS site when all those PS fanboys come rallying behind Sony and trying to fob off the difference as 'insignificant'.
It was as inevitable as my long 'essay' to say that I am not surprised - a device that's more powerful than the Pro and PS4 combined delivering what we expected it would and the fact that ALL that extra RAM was going to make a big difference to the Assets. I have been saying this for a long time and now we actually see 'games' running on this console for pretty much the first time since its reveal over a year ago - back when it was just a CGi video (I believe that's how you described it) has been built as described back at 2016 E3.
In all honesty, I can see this standard being considered the norm - just like 900p XB1 vs 1080p PS4 became the 'norm' for the past 4yrs. The XB1X delivering a higher resolution and higher assets whilst the Pro continues to deliver 1440p to CB4k with HD assets. Its the way Sony built the Pro to perform - you can see this from the fact they kept the same RAM with just a small boost to bandwidth.
I am NOT criticising the Pro at all - but I have said all along that the console is nothing more than a 'half step', a relatively small upgrade to offer nothing more than an increase in output resolution BUT that is what Sony wanted. They are still, as far as I have read from interviews etc, intending to follow the 'generational format and if they had taken that full step into 4k, they would have made it difficult to justify a PS5. If the Pro was able to offer the full 4k experience - inc 4k Bluray (which may have affected sales of their dedicated player they were about to release), then what could a PS5 offer?
Sony are in a 'strong' position now to bring out their PS5, offer an upgrade to every aspect. Not only in terms of delivering the full 4k graphics, but also in terms of RAM for assets, CPU for frame rates, Atmos audio for bth media and gaming, 4k HDR Bluray etc etc. If the Pro already offered the full 4k gaming and a 4k HDR Bluray, where can they go with the PS5? The only thing really could be frame rates but selling a console that offers full 4k/60 as opposed to their last gen iterative hardware delivering everything the PS5 could but may have to settle for 30fps or unlocked CB2160p isn't much of a step up that a 'new' generation can offer. The lack of restrictions could be a bonus - not having to limit the MP to 30fps because of the 'weakest' system and its inability to deliver that level of performance.
Anyway, I am still looking forward to my XB1X as well as gaming on my Pro too - Sony has some excellent games I am very interested in - pre-ordered Spider-Man so far and waiting to see if they bring out collectors editions of Days Gone and Last of Us 2 - although if Soy do bring out the PS5 sooner rather than later, I will be looking to buy that on day 1 too...
Nintendo has proven that great games are all that matter. Look at what games a console offers, and you'll see one that is severely lacking.
@get2sammyb Framerates and/or resolutions between competing consoles has always been good debate/poo-slinging material.
Unless you're nintendo, then it's just all of them fighting amongst themselves
@lacerz Xbox has some good games this gen, the big mistake they made was allowing them all to be shared with PC. Nintendo is their own worst enemy because they make great games, but can't seem to produce enough switches to really get their numbers up, because they're competing for parts with other big name companies.
@adf86 Of course people won't care too much if the Last of Us 2 is only 1440/30 - if that's the 'best' version available at the time. I bet though, if Sony were to release a PS5 version with full 4k resolution and Assets, 60fps and the possibility of Atmos audio - either through an headset or by an AV system, they would prefer that.
Its no different from people buying up the PS4 remastered Last of Us to get the game at a full 1080p and 60fps. 720p is the equivalent of 1440p to 2160p - the same increase in pixel density. So the ability to play tLoU2 at a full 2160/60 would be no different in terms of an increase. However, the difference would be a bit more than that because the textures etc were not 540p level on the PS3 version unlike the Pro version which will no doubt be using upscaled 1080p level assets etc.
I know some will be happy just to play the game at what ever level Sony release and whatever console they own. I do recall though how many people enthused over the increased resolution and in particular the ability to play at 60fps on the Last of Us remastered. How much that brought to the game.
I can watch a footy match for example in SD/24fps. I can watch it in HD/24 too but I can also watch (selected) matches in 4k/50. In ALL of these, just like any TV/film etc, yet 4k/50 is better than all of these - especially in the smoothness - F1 looks amazing in 4k - especially when they do the slo-mo where every detail is so pin sharp - its incredible - doesn't change the outcome of the race. I never watch SD channels when I can watch them in HD and I never watch HD when I can watch in 4k. HDR is something else entirely and that is incredible.
Point is, people will be happy if that's the 'best' that's on offer but I bet if Sony released a PS5 next year with the Last of Us 2 on both - but the PS5 version ran at a full 4k with full 4k assets etc and (at least) double the frame rate (with HDMI2.1 they could target upto 4k/120 and with Game VRR any frame rate at all and the image will be as silky smooth as it feels to play rather than tearing frames etc because its out of sync with the screens refresh rate), people would flock to that. Of course not just for Last of Us 2 but all the other games that look and play much better on that console - probably better than the X1X too given that Sony know exactly what the competition offers and I doubt they will want to do anything less than beat it spec for spec.
I personally want 4k but then I do own a decent 4k TV. I can see the 'blurry' upscaled textures in Pro games. I can see that Uncharted - despite looking great, still looks a bit soft compared to Horizon:ZD and I would love to see these in full 4k with full 4k assets - especially if they could hit 60fps too.
I bet if money was not an issue for people, they too would prefer a full 4k 60 game over a 1440/30 game even if the story was identical. The only people I hear whinging are those with 1080p TV's and not able to upgrade, those who 'at best' have a 5.1 audio system but most likely use their TV speakers. Those people who haven't bought a Pro etc but also those that complained about the 'visual' downgrade of games like Watchdogs, the Division, Witcher 3 etc...
Technology will move on - its inevitable. I know some people that find 1080p looks 'rough' now because they are used to high resolution. I really can't see Sony sitting on their hands so to speak for the next few years whilst MS consistently beats the Pro in performance. I am not just referring to visuals but audio and maybe frame rates too - coming third in the high-end area even if they win the HD era.
Like I said, I own both so it doesn't matter to me. If games like the Last of Us 2, Days Gone, Spider-Man etc are only 1440p on the Pro (although I do expect DG and SM to be CB4k) and that's the 'best' PS console at the time, I will be content to play on that system - its not like I have a choice to play it on a more capable 4k machine. If I had the choice to buy these on a 'PS5', I guarantee, I wouldn't be buying them for PS4 Pro - the equivalent to playing Last of Us, Uncharted 1-3, and all the multi-plat games at 720p on PS3 instead of buying a PS4 and playing them at a full 1080p.
Are you one of those people that wait for years and years for the 'next' gen to build up a decent library and happy to play 'last gen' versions of games that also get the 'new gen release? Games like AC4, BF4, CoD:Ghosts, CoD:AW, Fifa 14/15/16 etc or do you buy 'early' to get the best versions of the games?
Myself, I tend to buy early and buy the best versions I can of the games - much better than buying them 'twice' (old and new gen). I keep my old gen consoles too and these remain 'active' until my 'new' console has enough games that I find I am not playing my old gen console anymore. The great thing about both the Pro and X is that I automatically have a big library but I pre-ordered both the Pro and X so I would have them on Day 1 to improve my 'gaming' experience from Day 1 and I wold pre-order a PS5 today if I could!!
The OG PS4 did this to X1 at a lower price in 2013! If the PSPRO and X1X launched in 2013 at the same price (not $100 more) then I would have went X1X ! However I would have switch to PSPRO because of the Exclusive games and PSVR on PlayStation.
There is a lot more to what a console has other then graphics to fill your personal needs be it PlayStation or X Box 1 X or Switch! The imaginary console war is really a profit/payday desire that any and every one would want for the effort/work done.
I hope Sony's next console has double the power of PS4 Pro so developers wont have to make as many compromises when it comes to balancing performance with high quality visuals.
4.2 GHz 8-core AMD CPU
8.4 TFLOP AMD GPU
16 GB GDDR5 RAM
UHD BLURAY DRIVE
2TB HDD
it may seem like a crazy fantasy that will never happen but this is what's needed going forward.
I'll just wait for PS5 announcement next year at E3 (maybe!) and check out the tomb raider comparison then. Then move my PSN ecosystem (plus hundreds of exclusives) to the new system... Which will probably still be cheaper than xbx 😆 As a gamer I always go for the console with most triple A top rated games over a bit of better tech. Horizon, Uncharted 4, Bloodborne speaks louder then a xbx 4k with nothing exclusive or decent to show for it.
I hope this Holiday Season pushes better 4K TV's into the sub $1k price tag. $999. will do it. for the Samsung 8000 series. That's the time I will make the jump to 4K. A 28" monitor at Sub $399 with HDR would also work.
@kyleforrester87 @MadAussieBloke
100% agree with Kyle, defiantly give it a go
@BAMozzy Xbox1x is not more powerfull than ps4 pro and ps4 combined. Combined, ps4 pro & ps4 old has 4.2TF + 1.8TF : 6TF (the same as xb1x) and has more ram (16GB of ddr5 vs 12gb).
The audience for xbox1x is xbox1 old users that want to upgrade their machine so their game looks better, I don't think there's many people that want to buy $500 console to play 3rd party games like new assassin creed at 30 fps and dynamic 4k (the same as $400 ps4 pro). It needs exclusive games to sell beyond that audience.
It will sold better percentage wise to xbox users though since it's more compelling upgrade than regular ps4. Ps4 doesn't need ps4 pro since it already has better graphics than xbox1, while xbox1 original spec is not too good because microsoft focused on kinect.
It's weird that now so many people say exclusive doesn't matter though, the reason the very first xbox can exist is because of halo, xbox 360 become huge in usa because of halo + gears of war, nintendo switch will tank the same as ouya if it doesn't have exclusive like zelda, splatoon 2 and mario, the reason sony can sold more ps3 than xbox 360 in the end of it's lifetime is because they have many exclusive ip that can only be played at ps3, even xbox1 sold better than ps4 in usa when they launch their exclusive games like halo 5 and gear of war 4.
@BAMozzy Are you the new MS spokesman you are getting quite annoying with your massive blocks of text. We know now you love MS and yes you have way more differrent games on the PS4 and way more exclusive games to.
@Ypmud Unfortunately, this is all too true. I got the Xbox one s for UHD BluRay. I haven't played a game on it other than gears 4 which was brilliant but I haven't wanted to play any others.
@get2sammyb Haha its looking like your most commented on article ever 😂
@MadAussieBloke just picked up resident evil 7 over the weekend. So excited /terrified about booting that up in vr when I get home ☺
Pro will be dead in 5 months.
I hope this mid-Gen update dies really because SONY could then next year bring out the PS4 Pro 2 and that would be a bit better like the Xbox ONE X will be when it comes out. Nothing to see here then(especially no real Xbox Exclusives anymore anyway)
@MadAussieBloke sounds great sparc looks really interesting. currently new to psvr so still worki gthrough the launch games. Batman has blown me away.
Encouragingly, despite many naysayers, Sony seem to be fully behind vr too:
http://www.dualshockers.com/sony-super-focused-playstation-vr-aaa-games-coming/
Well, duh! Of course newer, more powerful, more expensive hardware is likely to produce a better-looking game. If it doesn't, something's gone terribly wrong. The question is, does the 40% more power make for a significantly better experience? Hmm... probably not. My PS4 Pro doesn't vastly improve my experience over my original PS4. Sure, it can make the visuals smoother on my 1080p TV, and it will let me save 1080p video rather than 720p for when I share something, but beyond that? The game experience doesn't really change.
But it's a bit of a nonsense comparison, really. If it's not using the same assets, then it's not comparing like-for-like. Even if you ignore the newer, more powerful hardware, you're comparing visuals which are already better by default, before the system does anything with them.
For my personal preferences, Microsoft have rendered the One/OneX irrelevant. They have no 'exclusives' of interest to me, and even if they did, I could play them on PC. There is no need for me to buy the console at all.
@Flaming_Kaiser No I'm not a spokesman for MS but then I am not an ignorant PS fanboy either!
@Paranoimia I am sure MS won't care if you buy their games and play on a PC - after all you had to get their Win10 OS and sign up to their eco-system to buy their games through their Store and will end up playing on their servers and probably with Xbox users too if you play MP. The games you buy can also be played on an Xbox console too at no extra charge so you could play on both PC and Xbox without having to buy the game twice and your save points and achievements are carried over between the both systems. The point is the PC isn't a separated eco-system as far as MS games are concerned. Of course multi-platform games are separated but I hear some of those may well be coming to their cross-play too.
The PS4 Pro isn't going to vastly improve the experience on a 1080p TV over a PS4. For a start, most games already run at 1080p so the only real gains are in those games that run under 1080p and those few games which offer a 60fps mode. I know a few games may have a bit more stable frame rates or less dynamic scaling and 1 or 2 may also offer super sampling or 'enhanced' visuals but these 'enhancements' don't exactly jump out and unless you compare with the base PS4, may not seem that different. Take Dirt 4 for example, both the Pro and base PS4 versions run at 1080p anyway but the Pro adds better reflections and a few other little tweaks and refinements that are not going to 'jump' out at you - certainly not as much as a bump in the resolution that would be obvious on a 4k screen.
The XB1X may not be that much different to PS4 or Pro on 1080p TV's. Of course you always get the super sampled image which may improve the image a bit - less shimmer etc and of course you may find a few other 'minor' differences but its still losing up to 75% of the pixels to fit on a 1080p screen. When compared to an XB1 which often doesn't offer a full 1080p, then the X will make much more of a difference to 1080p TV owners than the Pro did for PS4 owners.
For those with 1080p TV's, the differences between all 4 consoles are unlikely to be 'significant' in a number of areas and on a game by game basis. Of course the XB1 will be at the bottom of the pile but even then a number of games may run at a locked 1080/60 and so the difference will be 'marginal' as you move up through the different consoles. The PS4 will obviously come next because of the fact it offers more games at 1080p, then the Pro and top the XB1X but the differences between the Pro and X may be minimal. Will it make much difference if the X is offering a higher visual setting using CB4k in RotTR with high quality assets compared to the 1080p equivalent on Pro when its super-sampled down to 1080p anyway? Maybe a slight difference but maybe not worth the extra £100.
However when it comes to those with 4k TV's, the difference will be much more significant, much more obvious. Take that Higher visual setting mode as an example. For Pro owners, that 1080p mode is upscaled to 4k leaving the image looking a lot softer but the 'X' will look pin sharp and the textures will too - better than the Pro's high resolution mode that's also CB4k because of the better textures and higher visual settings.
You say you are a PC gamer so this is like the difference between a RX480 and GTX1070 when you only have a 1080p monitor with 60hz max refresh. Both cards can easily offer better than 1080p so is it worth spending the extra on a GTX1070 and using that to super sample down to 1080p? For owners of Radeon 7780-7870 cards (the equivalent to the XB1/PS4), both represent an upgrade and buying a RX480 maybe the cheaper option and guarantee the upcoming games should run at 1080p but then if you do upgrade your monitor to 4k, the difference between what the RX480 can offer compared to a GTX1070 becomes much more evident. You may be able to get the RX480 to run games in 4k if you use temporal filtering (where available), lower the quality of textures etc but the difference will still be much clearer than when you owned a 1080p monitor...
I think some people are going to have to accept that this is, in the vast majority of cases, going to be case from here until the rest of the gen. If you're big into graphics, get an Xbox One X (or better a PC). I was considering getting the X before the year started but frankly after it's reveal, I'm not sold. I'm still using a 1080p tv and the upgrade just isn't enough, same with PS4 Pro, and it's not like I won't be able to play the (very few) Xbox One games I want to anyway.
@Flaming_Kaiser Let's cool it, everyone is entitled to their opinion without getting insulted. If he annoys you so much there are other places you can go.
Hey - so a more powerful machine has some improvements. A PC with a GTX 1070 allows for better top visuals than a GTX 1060. I get it. In the meantime, that PC still has a GTX 1060. Look, the Pro has a lesser GPU, but it still has a damn improved one over the base PS4. I also have PSVR, and I am enjoying the improved resolution and clarity over my Base PS4. The Xbox1X has no VR tech at this moment & Sony is droppig the PSVR price. I love the Pro and my ecosystem with all these wonderful PS4 Pro exclusive visual improvements - games that the Xbox ecosystem will not have. The XboxOneX is a damn fine machine, and it is more powerful than the P4Pro... but it is not leaps and bounds more powerful, and the P4Pro does an excellent job on its own.
I do love nice new tech, but I will wait until the PS5 before I upgrade again. Getting a XB1X, but for what? Rebuying the same multiplat games I already own so I can replay them again? Or build a new library going forward so that the new PS5 and XB2 can come and make them obsolete again.
Yeah.. I get it. It is more powerful, but I have no need of an upgrade like that at this time. Lets see how much bigger, better the new consoles will be - just around the corner.
@BAMozzy I'm not currently a PC gamer, haven't been for several years, but should be again soon as I'll be adding a little more to the price of an X and treating myself to a reasonably competent gaming PC. But again, not 4K... no matter how hard Sony, Microsoft, or anyone else pushes it, I have no interest in it.
As I said, MS don't have any games I'm interested in, so it would be third-party games I'd be buying... so other than Windows which comes with the PC, I wouldn't be using their ecosystem at all, as I'd either get the PC disc version, or more likely Steam - either of which would be cheaper than the Xbox version, and for anyone fussed about technical details, more than likely the better/best version as well. I had an original XBox and a 360, but for me, the lack of compelling exclusives combined with the ability to play any such 'exclusives' on PC, MS has pushed the XB1/X to a position of being largely irrelevant hardware - at least for those people with a decent PC.
As for "native" 4K, let's not forget that only MS own games are guaranteed to support it. Last I read, many/most third-party games on the X are using checkerboard rendering, just as on the Pro; it's not quite the native 4K 'dream machine' many were hoping for. I don't think we'll see that as standard until at least the next generation.
Still, each to their own. If it floats your boat, go for it and have fun.
@Paranoimia That's fair enough BUT if you were interested in any of the exclusives that also are on PC, you cannot buy these via steam or disc. They are only available through the MS store and to those with an MS 'Xbox' type account. The same account you would set up if you were to buy an Xbox console. If its just multi-platform games, then a PC may well suit you better than an XB1X - especially if you have no interest in 4k at the moment.
The point of the XB1X, just like the XB1 or PS4 has always been about the ease of use and plug and play nature. Not many want to invest in a gaming PC set up and whilst I know you can use a TV, it seems counter intuitive to use the TV when a dedicated monitor offers the best experience due to minimal input lag and capability to use Variable refesh rates and higher frame rates too. Most TV's can only offer 60hz - even those that may say 120hz or more because the TV artificially creates those extra frames instead of accurately using the frames that are produced by the PC.
Therefore, if you are looking for the 'best' PC experience - regardless of whether you buy a 1080, 1440 or 2160p monitor, its still better to have the PC desk, Monitor, speaker (or at least a decent headset), chair and of course the space to set this all up. There are a number of people who spend all day at a desk in front of a PC and just want the ease, simplicity and comfort of gaming on a console from their sofa in front of the TV. All the XB1X offers is that 'near' PC quality visuals in that 'easy' plug and play with the added benefit of being a multi-media device - the ability to kick back and watch a Bluray etc.
As you say, each to their own but the XB1X is no different to the XB1, XB360, PS3, PS4 etc. Last gen (for example), you could have bought a Console - for the exclusives and gamed on PC's at or above, the level that consoles offered too. Even before the time the PS4/XB1 arrived, PC's were offering 4k gaming - although Hardware was incredibly expensive to get that level of performance and at most, people could still game at 1440p - that's 4x the resolution of 720p. Its nothing NEW!!
The only difference is that now Consoles are also able to offer 'up to' 4k to go with 4k TV's that really started to arrive less than a year after the XB1 and PS4 launched - in fact I have owned a 4k TV since 2014 myself.
As for 'Native' resolutions. According to Ubisoft, Assassins Creed: Origins uses a dynamic scaling which can easily hit native 4k. In some situations - quite probably when you use that 'Eagle' with massive draw distances including all those NPC's and AI, then maybe we will see some CB to keep the frame rates from tanking. However UbiSoft are the ones pushing CB forward and for PC's, Temporal Filtering (or more commonly CB) is hailed as a revolution - the opportunity to push resolution up, visual settings up without tanking the frame rates and 'minimal' loss to PQ over native. Unless you sit inches from and pause and study the static image, you can't tell.
I have NO issue with CB and its been used to great effect in games like Killzone, Rainbow Six Seige, Watchdogs 2 and of course Horizon:ZD. Whether AC: Origins uses it for XB1X or not is not a big deal - especially if it enables Ubisoft to push Draw Distances, other visual settings etc. I bet it will be like Watchdogs 2 though on Pro - ie 1800p CB and then upscaled to 4k - that's similar to the 900p XB1 to 1080p PS4 - although in that example both the XB1 and PS4 will be using the same assets and probably same visual settings to0 where as the XB1X will be using the same assets as a PC capable of delivering 4k and a lot of similar settings too. The big difference will probably be frame rates as the PC can offer 60fps+. If the PC is struggling to hit 4k with 'ultra' settings and a 60fps or above with your 'current' hardware, then no doubt as its an Ubisoft game, you will have the option to turn on Temporal Filtering. That option can also help if you are struggling to hit 1440p at a frame rate and visual setting you want.
A lot of 3rd Party games though have confirmed a Native 4k resolution - games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, Shadow of War, Project Cars 2, Titanfall 2 (although it does use dynamic scaling to ensure the GPU is always working at 100% so can achieve greater than a native 4k - I hear 6k was recorded at one point in the game - better than 1440p on Pro). There are a lot of others saying 4k but its unclear whether its 'native' or CB but we may have to wait for DF to analyse.
CB isn't a 'bad' thing, I would prefer Temporal Filtering (CB) 4k/60 with maybe extra bells and whistles over a 'native' 4k/30 because CB can achieve an incredible 4k image with lower resources - ok, under a microscope it may not quite match up to a native 4k, but at most normal sitting distance, you can't often see any differences at all. The chances are though, that when the XB1X is using CB 4k, the Pro is using 1800p (or less) CB rendering and then upscaling that to 4k - and without the 'high res' assets too. Regardless of whether a PC can beat it or not, no console will - and considering most people spend their time gaming on 3rd party multi-platform releases with the 'occasional' Exclusive.
If you are happy with HD, non-HDR visuals, own a PC capable of delivering 1080p comfortably and not interested in the MS exclusives - then it makes no sense to buy the most powerful console on the market - probably make little sense to buy the Pro either but I can bet that the PS5, when it arrives, will be built for 4k...
I don't know why people are having a go at me. Is it because I am not a PS fanboy and can see things for what they are? Is it because I am not afraid to give kudos where it is deserved - regardless of whether that's towards MS or Sony? Is it because they are now no longer the proud owner of the most powerful console and that the majority of their games will now look, sound and/or play better on another console? That their 4yr dominance is coming to an end - at least until Sony bring out a PS5 and those 'fanboys' can then again 'gloat' over the MS gamers once again?
I really don't care as I (will) own both a Pro and X and as such will get to play ALL the big games releasing on either platform at their best. If that happens to be 1440p for Last of Us 2, CB 4k for Days Gone, Native 4k for Forza 7 or Sea of Thieves, or Native/CB 4k for all the multi-platform releases due out in the foreseeable future. Yes a PC may offer 'better' if you are willing or able to have a gaming Rig with better hardware inside and a lot of the MS exclusives will be available to buy from MS's store on both PC and Xbox - although if you want 'Physical' then you need the console so either way MS still get your money regardless. But for the 'millions and millions' of gamers who can't or have little/no interest in PC gaming for whatever reason, the XB1X is likely to be the 'next best' place to play the multitude of multi-platform games.
What it does is give gamers a choice of which platform to buy if you are investing in a console for the 4k generation - whether you pan to jump in now or later, its the next step. Gamers have a choice to pick up the Pro because it has the better exclusives but is 'under-powered' compared to the alternative and lacking the full 4k media suite - inc Audio, or buy the more expensive XB1X that has the full 4k media suite, other next gen features and much more capable of delivering a 'full UHD' (whether CB or Native its still a full 4k image and no upscaling) but may not have the variety or numerous exclusives.
For those invested in the XB console, or those coming to it fresh, the X still offers a 'big' library of games (admittedly a lot are multi-platform) with quite a few of the 'Exclusives' upgraded - from Sunset Overdrive, FH3, Gears 4, Recore, Quantum Break etc, as well as big range of BC games and a number of older 3rd party multi-platform games getting an upgrade too - Witcher 3, Doom, Fallout 4, Dishonoured 2, RE7, GR: Wildlands, Skyrim and of course RotTR too.
Even the non-patched games will benefit too with faster load times, no screen tear, better anisotropic filtering and much more likely to run at their 'capped' limit to improve performance. The boost mode is higher than that in the Pro and all that extra and faster RAM can be used as a cache too.
Of course its not going to appeal to everyone - especially those with high-end gaming PCs or PS fanboys but for Console gamers, its an incredible piece of hardware.
As you say, each to their own. I know I will be happy to game on the XB1X - with my Xbox Elite controller and still incredibly excited by the prospect of playing games like Spider-Man, Days Gone etc on my Pro too. The ONLY thing that would raise my excitement on these games would be the announcement and release of a much more powerful PS5. If Sony were releasing that this year, I would still by an XB1X but my priority would have switched to the PS5 and most of the games I am looking forward to playing would be bought for the PS5 instead of XB1x.
I know PC's are much more generalised but if they had exclusive AMD games and Multi-platform games had to be purchased for either AMD or nVidia, and you had two PC's connected to a 4k monitor - one with an RX480 and the other with an nVidia GTX1070, which version of the multi-platform games would you buy? The one that offers decent 1440p but has to use HD assets to run well enough or the version that can run at 2160p with full 4k Assets for the same price?
Anyone who says they would buy these for the AMD PC would be lying as they would certainly buy the version that looks, runs and or performs best with their current set up. Maybe in a year or two, they may upgrade that RX480 to a AMD Navi that blows the GTX1070 away and then buy multi-platform games for the AMD PC. That's the same principal I apply. Until Sony regains the advantage they have had for the past 4yrs, I will (most likely) be buying more games for the XB1X - Its NOT Bias, its about having the 'best' console gaming experience and access to the biggest range of exclusives that appeal - hence I have always owned at least 2 and at times 3 Consoles. I owned the N64 and PS1, I owned the PS2 and Xbox (I also had access to the Gamecube and Dreamcast too), I own the XB360, PS3 and Wii (although the Wii went when it became nothing but a dust collector). Now I own a XB1, XB1s and (soon) XB1x as well as a PS4, PS4 Pro and a decent 4k HDR TV with excellent gaming performance (for a TV anyway). I have been gaming for 40yrs and NEVER had a 'bias' to a particular brand. If Apple or even Sega opted to make a console that's 'better' than anything I own with all the multi-plat releases, I would probably add that too - Why? because I am gamer first and foremost and, in my situation, a PC set-up is currently not an option - not until we can buy a 4k HDR Monitor with Freesync/Game VRR, eARC, HFR and ALL HDR options like HDR10, HLG, HDR10+ and (maybe) DV too, that I can plug ALL my consoles as well as the PC and SkyQ into and game wirelessly from the comfort of my Sofa easily and utilise (upto) Atmos/DTS-X Audio too...
@BAMozzy TL;DR
But based on the first paragraph, you need to re-read what I said.
Meh, who cares? If you are this obsessed about the graphics, you would have already moved on and become a PC gamer. I play PlayStation because of the awesome games.
@get2sammyb "Dont bother its not great" WTF Rise of The Tomb Raider is awesome. Now you are just being ridiculous. I got to play it on 2 systems and I will play it through again when the "X" enhanced version comes out.
@RustyBullet Enjoy!
All fanboyism aside... do people still care about such differences still? In an age where people are playing 8 bit games, on purpose, because they are FUN.
Obviously it looks gorgeous. For the price... it should. But honestly, it isn't a game changer for me, and unless Microsoft starts stepping it up in the only department that matters, Really fun and exclusive gaming experiences, then this is a very expensive box that will sit on store shelves across the world.
I'll be honest, you can see a difference but it's not that big of a difference. But that's where we are with the gaming industry. It's always that battle. I hope the Xbox 1 S, or whatever it's called now sells. I really do. It's good for the industry to have all three killing it.
As for me and my family, we've always been Nintendo first and then support it with either Sony or Microsoft (or NEC/Panisonic/Sega back in the day). We finally were able to pick up a Switch about a month ago and that's all we've been playing. I may have touched the PS4 2 times in that time period and my sons might have played the PS4 once. However, I have not regretted my PS4 purchase. I've got to play some great titles that I missed out on the PS3 and there are some real gems on the horizon.
I will admit that Forza will be terrific on the new Xbox though. Easily the best racing simulator on the market and racing games are where you show off your console's power. I don't doubt for a minute that it won't be better than GT, but that's just my opinion.
It could look like real life and I would still not buy one to much money for zero games I always buy all consoles but I will wait on an X for next year after E3 and see what they do but as of now I am not holding out hope as they look to only have 2 exclusives between here and then
For me, the reason why Microsoft will continue to trail Sony is nothing todo with power, games or graphics.
I'm currently living with my in-laws whilst me and wife are waiting for our new house to be built. They live in the sticks and when their internet chooses to work 1mb is a dream of a speed. I bought myself an Xbox one a few days ago as there are now a few exclusives I really fancy playing. I found out that you can't even get to the XBONE dashboard without an internet connection. This was not stated on the box to be clear. The console is also set to shut off after inactivity so I can't even leave it to update when I'm at work if it's a day when the internet is working. It's basically a brick.
They might as well of just stuck with their always online plan.
Xbox one X could be the best thing since sliced bread, cheap as chips with mountains of games hitting 60FPS but sadly there are people who still live with medieval internet!
Digital Foundry has had to hold their hands up and admit they were wrong - the images shown by them and that cycu1 channel shows the X version of Lara with scars and battle damage yet the other 2 version (PC and PS4) were shown without the effect, so that's why you couldn't see the injury's on her in the videos.
they have released another image showing the damage and PC is clearly a higher definition than the X version and they have, once again, decided to show the 1080p version of the pro as a comparison to the 4k modes of the other 2 titles - I don't know why they decided to do that when the Pro has a 2160p via CB mode in it.
@get2sammyb
http://kotaku.com/the-nintendo-switch-keeps-outselling-the-ps4-in-japan-1798691215
Who needs facts, right? Just face it, Switch is doing very well, minds are boggled, and you fanboys can't stand it.
@Bad-MuthaAdebisi
16-bit? Are you crazy? It looks like NEC's version of 16-bit - two 8 bit processors working in tandem.
@Owenstoodstill, mate if you go into settings you can extend or turn off auto turn off console 😊
@BAmozzy why did you just repeat all the stats verbatim? We all read the article & watch tv, we know the stats. Clearly your a fanboy. I’ve reserved the Xboxone X special edition Scorpio, but I play both & these guys are right! No exclusives games like Detriot BH, Spiderman, Last of Us 2 to name a few. Xbox has Forza & Sea of Thieves (next year). It’s games vs hardware, and gamers play for the GAMES & exclusives. Xbox looses in any battle for serious gamers, argue all you want, but that’s fact.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...