So WHY exactly are console games still 30fps?

Damn console gamers, you live like this?

that's just one example where they could in theory get a last gen game to run at 60fps on current gen. In the majority of cases, the trouble is simply that the consoles are underpowered and the consumers unironically prefer fancier graphics to a better frame rate. There's no doubt games would look worse if 60fps was the goal and then the games that go for prettier graphics and 30fps would sell more because most consolefags legit can't tell the difference.

Resolution and Graphics > Framerate.

>push your underpowered hardware to the limits trying to achieve visuals you can't
>get a hardware revision that give you the power of a mid-range pc but should be more than enough to meet the visuals you were attempting
>push this new hardware to the limits trying to achieve visuals you can't while also being basically unplayable on the original hardware
build for what you have you idiots

Attached: 1509943699179.png (223x223, 146K)

On PC you can have ALL of those.
Again, COPE poorfag.

Attached: laughing chidori.png (400x404, 184K)

some people prefer better visuals than 60 fps. If the dev prefers to prioritize visual quality to fluidity, he has every right to do so.

see

Attached: Laughnata.jpg (335x461, 119K)

are you baiting or just extremely retarded?

>PS4 and Xbone are 60 FPS at 1080p
>Switch can't even do 30 FPS at 720p
but why

Rolled 2 (1d6)

On a scale of 1-6, how retarded are you?

60fps is like the minimum though.
90-100 is where it gets really good, 120-144fps being better but not a big deal.

No you are just retarded.

Using marketing logic, but forgot to point that out/6.

switch isnt even more powerful than the ps3 and 360

Yeah and I have every right not to buy their shitty hardware and software. Devs have the "right" to make bad products but it's not in anybody's interest.

you might prefer your car to have square wheels but that doesn't exempt you from being a moron.

In many occasions, in games in which I do not strictly need the maximum fluency, I block the rate at 30fps. I understand that 60 fps is better than 30, always in all cases. But the expense of resources of my gpu and cpu is not worth it for a strictly visual improvement that, in games like gta v or The Witcher, does not improve or worsen the playable experience at all.

Let's be honest, do you STRICTLY NEED 60+ fps for skyrim or mass effect?

Will the google streaming replace consoleshits eventually?

Your fortune: ｷﾀ━━━━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━━━━ !!!!

Absolutely terrible analogy that is not worth counter-arguing.

yes.

The good modern console FPS add gyro controls now

There are plenty of 60 fps games on PS4 and Xbone

elaborate

Brainlets don't notice the difference and performance goals are way easier to reach at 30 than 60.

t. no argument

Because 30 is fine.

Because it's a $300 handheld with a underclocked mobile gpu

Because most developers have prioritized photorealism over performance, so naturally performance will suffer as a result. That combined with the fact that consoles are still just weak-ass poorman's PCs means we'll probably never escape 30 fps. It's here to stay so long as console makers cheap out and developers favor photorealism over performance.

>30fps it’s Master Race
>60fps and higher was created to plebs who need more fps to play better since they lack the skill

>post some random sucking at games
>hurrr consoles btfo

Because graphics sell more than framerate. Pretty screenshots will get you more pre-orders than saying you target 60fps.

To be fair they somehow made it work, by using smart motion blur and slowing down gameplay/camera movement the games play fine, especially if you are used to it but Yea Forums loves to self felate about how much superior gamers they are despite playing shit games on toasters and shitting on consoles is a low hanging fruit.

It's more like a seat warmer.

because more fps would mean more expensive consoles

They are not. It is amusing how Yea Forums always outs itself as not knowing SHIT about videogames. Its more about gamer culture here ain't it?

Attached: Ys-VIII-Lacrimosa-of-DANA-Wallpaper-01-1920x1080.jpg (1920x1080, 619K)

Attached: 1530450166730.webm (960x540, 2.93M)

Because no one cares about fps except autists

Because their GPUs are weaker than 9 year old high-end(but not even absolute top-end) ones or 7 year old midrange models.

Attached: lul.gif (400x340, 48K)

graphics

even if console had an i9 and a 2080 ti devs would still make the games run at 30fps for grafix

Attached: 20190120221806_1.jpg (3840x2160, 1.91M)

This is why TPS should be default for console shooters.

As long as it's not in games like Tetris, which demand 60 fps and no input lag, then I'm largely okay with it. It really depends on the genre for me.

Is this true
So you're saying it's possible to boost it back up with software.

Because there are more graphicsfags than fpsfags.

Literally this.

>PS4 and Xbone are 60 FPS at 1080p
You mean 43 FPS at 972p.

>bad products but it's not in anybody's interest.
you missed the point. Thiis thread is not about the inherent quality of X game.

30fps car and 60 fps cars run at literally the same speed. They get to the same destination at the same speed (if you don't count e-sports games or tetris, where input lag is crucial and even 60fps is not enough).

If you think 30fps is like riding a car with square wheels, you are incredibly bluepilled.

30 is perfectly playable

anyone who says otherwise is blatantly lying desu

Because Graphics sell, framerate doesnt, and you mongrels accept 30fps games

>Being this bluepilled

Attached: A fine addition.png (1226x690, 824K)

No, you're missing the point. The quality of a game is subjectively based on a number of factors, including graphics quality and performance. By not giving me the option to turn all that shit off (which is a minimal amount of work, and standard on PC) the quality of that content is diminished to a significant number of people while being irrelevant to those who prefer grafixfaggotry.

Hawsepowa

>performance
According To your logic, RDR 2 would be an objectively better game if it ran at 60fps.

According To your logic, no game can reach its full potential if it does not reach 60 fps.

I respectfully disagree with you: I Do Not think the performance of a game should be one more scale to assess its quality IF IT REACHES a minimum. 30 fps is that minimum.

Answer me a question: Skyrim and Mass Effect are objectively better games if they are played at 60 fps? And Pillars of eternity? and Divinity?

Its Quality as a video game raises a point of valuation although the playable experiende is literally the same because that extra fluidity is not necessary? All to the detriment of a greater visual detail...

Then we can disagree. What do you lose if the option is open to me?

Why is 30 the minimum? OOT ran at 20ish fps

Because nintendo is the only one giving a fuck about that and they have the worst position in the market

Resolution/visual quality will always take top priority over framerate.

>According To your logic, RDR 2 would be an objectively better game if it ran at 60fps.
It objectively would. Port it to the PC and even a midrange one could easily do 1080p/60fps.
Also why the fuck do you feel the need to separate every single line into a paragraph? A single newline is enough.

Attached: OP SHIT PLS NERF.webm (640x360, 1.36M)

Nothing. I find it fantastic that there is the option to choose between fluency or higher visual quality. In my opinion, it is the solution to all the problems. If You prefer fluency, go ahead. Good choice.

What I do not like is this repudiation that exists towards the 30fps as if it were something completely unacceptable in any case. Which is far from true. Nothing else. Have a good day.

>I find it fantastic that there is the option to choose between fluency or higher visual quality.
Only on PC. This shit isn't standard on consoles, but it should be.
I don't think 60fps always matters. JRPGs don't exactly need a high framerate. But FFS just give me the option already.

>It objectively would
How? Does that apply to every single game in existence?
Explain to me how Pillar of Eternity would be an objectively better game than it is right now if it ran at 60 fps instead of 30. (in the hypothetical case that it was locked to 30).

>Also why the fuck do you feel the need to separate every single line into a paragraph? A single newline is enough.
idk

Today's standards. I Don't have much more to say.

I know it's you, Ranger.

So WHY exactly do you retarded niggers still ask this question?
It's because all zoomers think gwaphix>fps

>The good modern console FPS add gyro controls now

The only games I've seen use gyro controls on shooters are Switch titles, why the fuck don't they use them on PS4 games?

Attached: 1552888423706.webm (888x500, 1.56M)

>How? Does that apply to every single game in existence?
yes. Even Microsoft Excel feels better to use on a 144hz monitor than a 60Hz one.
>Explain to me how Pillar of Eternity would be an objectively better game than it is right now if it ran at 60 fps instead of 30. (in the hypothetical case that it was locked to 30).
Because it would look better and feel more responsive.

>Because it would look better and feel more responsive.
But isn't 30fps responsive enough for a game like POE? I mean, is not like 30fps gives you 20 seconds of input lag.

>Because it would look better
How? FPS makes the game RUN better, not LOOK better. That's a subjective term.

>responsive enough
It's not. Any game relying on mouse control needs at least 60, otherwise mouse movement feels terrible. And even if it were it doesn't matter. More responsive is always better even if it's not strictly "necessary". Less input lag is objective better.
Smoother visuals are objectively better just like higher resolutions are objectively better. Nothing subjective about it.

Attached: Better in every way.webm (600x338, 726K)

>Any game relying on mouse control needs at least 60
any games that need fast mouse precision movements needs 60 fps, POE doesn't need that.

It always depends on the game and the playable experience that it offers. Do you NEED 200+FPS for csgo? Yes.
Do you NEED 30+ fps for POE or AOEII? IMO, no.

You need more examples than this. Like RPGs for example where it's stylized graphics so having limited frames makes moving look like shit.

>POE
You use your mouse to move your character around, you absolutely need 60 FPS for smooth mouse movement. Regardless of the type of game, even clicking icons on your desktop is going to feel horrible at low framerates.
>AOEII
>doesn't need high FPS
Unironically kill yourself. RTS is the most APM-intensive genre unless you're a shitty casual.

man you are close minded. I understand your pov, please do some mental exercise to understand mine.

I end the convo here. Have a nice day.

Please go back wherever the fuck you came from faggot. Or just kill yourself.

Attached: kys.jpg (243x207, 9K)

Telling people to commit suicide is not ok.

For the Xbone? Yes. PS4 easily hits 60fps at 1080p on just about every one of their exclusives though.

Because they are too obsessed with "muh 4k" at the moment, instead of focusing on trying to get at least 1080p 60fps first. I bet next gen they are going to focus on ray tracing, instead of once again trying to hit at least 1080p 60.

Because the biggest share of the market is the casual gamer, whether you like it or not. You can easily get them to buy the newest game by making it look pretty, telling them it runs at 60 fps does almost nothing in terms of marketing. That's why certain genres use 60 fps, because they aren't focused on casual gamers, like fighting games for example..

Attached: 1553045124165.jpg (1099x1195, 479K)

(you)

Attached: At least try.jpg (600x600, 18K)

The only PS4 games I can name that runs at 1080p60 are 7th gen ports and Doom. What the hell are you talking about?

SHIT TIER CPUs

Doesn't mean we should roll over and let it be the end all be allCoin Flip: Tails

Attached: 6954631.png (430x363, 195K)

/thread

JUST

>PS4 easily hits 60fps at 1080p on just about every one of their exclusives though.
What do you think you'll gain from lying on the internet? PS4 exclusives can't even maintain 1080p30fps. Either dropping to 26 fps or using dynamic resolution and running at 900p. Or both.

>daily reminder older consoles can run more games at 60 fps than nu-gen consoles can
youtube.com/watch?v=xo6kOr52FYk

>You use your mouse to move your character around, you absolutely need 60 FPS for smooth mouse movement
have you even played it? its not a game about MUH REACTION TIME faggot

exquisite bait until this post. id give it 8.5/10

Maybe for a mongoloid, like you.

Neither is your browser yet limiting your monitor to 30Hz and trying to browse the internet is a horrible experience.

more like barely playable and with a controller. any game drop frames super hard when you move the camera at mouse speed

I'm talking about things that actually exist and actually happened. All you PCfags are ridiculous.

>Has never owned much less played a PS4 game
Keep seething.

>not able to differentiate between Hz and fps
>comparing web browsing to vidya

lostallhope.com

I own a PS4, it's my main gaming platform because it's a poorfag. The only games in my library which run at 1080p60 are Doom, Uncharted Trilogy and MGSV.

Why PCs that play games below 30fps still exists?

>WHY exactly are console games still 30fps?
why are you a retard who doesn't understand how games works?

it's something the devs decide, any game could be optimized for 60 FPS, or even 120, devs just often choose graphical fidelity/resolution instead.
Most action games already target 60 FPS on consoles (first person shooters, fighting games, hack n slashes, etc), some games like Nioh or GoW on ps4 give you an ability to pick between higher fps or higher graphical fidelity/resolution mode. Hopefully more games will allow add this option, otherwise no matter how strong you make a console, the devs can always just decide that they will sacrifice more FPS for better graphical fidelity.

>You mean 43 FPS at 972p.
Nope, 1080p and 60fps

30 fps looks nice like a movie :)
it's why bloodborne looks better than ds3

>things that actually exist and actually happened
GoW 4: 30
Spiderman: 30
Uncharted 4: 30
Bloodborne: 30
DriveClub: 30
KillZone Shadowfall: 30
Knack: 30
Planetside 2: 30
The Order 1886: 30

Where are all these PS4 exclusives which aren't 7th gen ports that run at 1080p/60fps?

I have PC that is more expensive than all current gen consoles and it plays some games at 30fps. Not every person is willing to pay 800$ for a gaming device every 2-3 years and this is the reason, you idiot.

You're literally wrong samefag.

Also it's not even just the exclusives. Sekiro hits 60fps all the fucking time on every system. Cope.

GoW runs above 50fps on Pro, Uncharted has 60fps in multiplayer.
>PS4 exclusives that aren't this and aren't that
Goalposts moving

Sekiro is 30 though.

A Hertz is literally 1/second or "per second" in colloquial speech. Only gamers are retarded enough to think Hertz are somehow intrinsically linked to monitor refresh rate and not just a general unit.
>comparing web browsing to vidya
It's to demonstrate than even an activity that requires 0 reaction time like web browsing is terrible when you don't have at least semi-smooth mouse movement.

Sekiro only runs at 30 on base and fails to hit 60 on Pro.
youtube.com/watch?v=vmVM1LsbHvA

"Above 50fps" is not 60fps and PS4 Pro is not PS4.

Most games play the same at 30fps, all look better though.

>Sekiro hits 60fps all the fucking time on every system

I played it on PS4 pro and its more like 40-60,sometimes it hits 60 though.

>tfw sekiro runs 60 fps maxed on pic related
Consoleniggers are pathetic.

Attached: vapor x 290.jpg (1024x497, 82K)

>PS4
I don't understand why do you expect running all games at 60fps on 5-year-old 230$ hardware, no matter console or PC.

>"Above 50fps" is not 60fps
it hits 60fps though.
>PS4 Pro is not PS4
And? PS4 Pro is a console last time I checked.

>literally wrong
Literally listed what framerate games run at on the PS4. These are objective facts.
>seikiro hits 60FPS all the fucking time
LMAO
youtube.com/watch?v=mYwxbkwQ03Y
It runs at like 40 FPS on the Pro and only hits 60 for like a second in a cutscene. Stop lying
>50+ on the PS4 Pro
>Goalposts moving
Imagine saying that after trying to claim that 50+ is 60 and that the PS4 Pro is the PS4
youtube.com/watch?v=mYwxbkwQ03Y
Also it hits 50+ sometimes then plummets down to 38. Try harder.

Attached: hrblblbl.png (461x796, 410K)

because PC is, and will always be superior

That’s up to the devs if they want to optimize for 60fps or not.

Console hardware is simply too weak.

Unless the game is CPU bound you can do it by turning graphics options down. I can do that on a budget PC, so why can I not do that on a PS4?

Hitting 60fps is not the same as maintaining 60fps. MGS4 "hits" 60fps when you look at a fucking wall, that doesn't mean the median experience isn't a 20fps slog.
The discussion was originally around the PS4. Bringing up the PS4 Pro is moving the goalposts.

A lot of devs still trying to push graphics over framerate so the have to make sacrafices. It sucks to me that next gen will probably prioritse meme 4K over just getting 1080p 60fps. It's not all bad though, i got games like RE2 running at 1080p 60fps and that thing looks amazing.

Attached: F1A13640-1611-492B-A42E-1B6BA05F5987.jpg (720x720, 31K)

>Imagine saying that after trying to claim that 50+ is 60 and that the PS4 Pro is the PS4
PS4 Pro is console and GoW actually runs at 60fps. Only goalposts move is made by (You)

Rate my setup bro.

Attached: C79D03BC-9793-4F1A-99E1-615A3E5B9B27.jpg (750x982, 91K)

Ridge Racer 7 launched on the PS3 with 1080p and 60fps. It's possible, they simply have other priorities.

11/10

fuckin quality bro, 10/10

Attached: 1553323291924.png (602x556, 512K)

Love that monitor

>Unless the game is CPU bound you can do it by turning graphics options down. I can do that on a budget PC, so why can I not do that on a PS4?
No, you can't run all games at 60fps at 250$ PC even at low settings In fact you won't be in most AAA games.
>Hitting 60fps is not the same as maintaining 60fps
You were talking about running game at 60fps not running it without drops. Goalposts moving.

>Actually runs at 60 fps.
Already linked a video proving this is not true. 39=/=60
52=/=60
Being able to barely hit 60 for 2 seconds every 8 minutes is not the same as running at 60.
>PS4 easily hits 60fps at 1080p on just about every one of their exclusives though.
This was your original statement. Note "PS4" not "PS4 Pro" and "Just about every one of their exclusives" and not "about one in 15 games".

Because the ps4 gyro is hot shit.

You could make the same argument about toaster grade PCs which are what the vast majority of pc gamers use.

I don't mind cinematic games on PS with 30fps that I can play on my TV. I play fps and other games on PC anyways. I don't own a single game that is not exclusive on ps.

Attached: 1554115708574.jpg (409x673, 79K)

Attached: average_console_player.webm (1280x720, 2.86M)

You're most likely talking to that user who thinks MHW runs flawlessly on ps4 so I wouldn't bother.

>5 year old hardware
The PS4 PRO has a GPU that's weaker than a 6 year old GTX 780(not even 780ti) and even gets demolished by a 3 year old low-end RX 470.
And you expect that piece of shit to run games at 60 fps just because Sony called it "pro"?

Attached: very pro.png (641x414, 36K)

>Already linked a video proving this is not true.
You linked a different game. You need to work on your reading comprehension.
>Being able to barely hit 60 for 2 seconds
False, also running game at 60fps is running game at 60fps even with drops.
>This was your original statement.
No, it wasn't. Again, work on your reading comprehension.
>Just about every one of their exclusives
Already disproved with GoW, Uncharted, also Gran Turismo Sport and Shadow of the Colossus (inb4 port), which is a remake on a different engine.

A game running at 60 80% of the time and dropping below that is "running at 60 with drops".
A game running at 43-50 80% of the time and hitting 60 for 3 seconds is running at 45 with spikes.

You were talking about PS4 not PS4Pro now you idiot. Also both run games at 60fps.

I don't care about your imaginary rules, again running game at 60fps is running game at 60fps.

DMC5 and RE2 both run with fluid 60fps,ofcourse it doesn't have the strongest gpu but you also ignore optimization. It does run games at 60 but not all obviously.

Attached: 1544453760453.jpg (400x411, 44K)

youtube.com/watch?v=xepW3bAyeeI

"""60 FPS""""
>But uncharted runs at 60 in multiplayer.
Nobody gives a fuck, it's a singleplayer game. It runs at 30 in singleplayer.
>no it wasn't
I literally quoted your original statement, imagine lying this hard.
The base PS4 can't even compete with 9 year old hardware lul.
>both run games at 60 fps
Both run last-gen ports at 60 FPS.
>Game literally can't maintain 60 for more than a few seconds
>imaginary rules
Imagine being this much of a shill.

Attached: 13b.jpg (1369x1183, 338K)

Because gyro controls are a stupid gimmick.

You know what? That's my bad. I made the incorrect assumption that when people are talking about PS4, they would naturally be implying the specs of the Pro, because why the hell would they be playing on anything less?

>"""60 FPS""""
Yes, this is 60fps.
>Nobody gives a fuck
Source?
>The base PS4 can't even compete with 9 year old hardware lul.
You must be retarded.
>Both run last-gen ports at 60 FPS.
Which are video games last time I checked, it also run many current gen games like Doom at 60fps so again you are wrong.
>Imagine being this much of a shill.
What? You sound like a retard again.

>tfw 30 fps
>still more games than pc """"""""""master"""""""""" race

Attached: .png (191x264, 9K)

>fluid 60 fps.

Attached: Fluid.png (1920x1080, 1.78M)

9 year old GTX 570 vs PS4.
PS4 GPU is still slower.

Attached: base lul.gif (389x340, 46K)

Do you retards not realize that with a high end GPU you can have BOTH high fps and maximum quality graphics? You can have both, you don't have to choose on PC. YOURE ALL SO STUPID

Attached: maniacal_laugh.gif (540x540, 279K)

Show me 9yr old PC running Witcher 3 user.

>upgrading your PC entirely every 2-3 years
Are you a fucking idiot?

>Yes, this is 60 fps.
Why you lying?

Attached: 60 fps.png (1920x1080, 2.76M)

But it will cost ya.

Attached: F3772EC5-902D-4845-983E-D390DB4D8881.gif (320x250, 460K)

So good luck getting 60fps in every game you idiot.
>showing frame drop still image as proof that game doesn't run at 60fps
Are you clinically retarded?

I'm well aware of how having a strong PC works. You never mention the tradeoffs

>Buggy PC Ports
>Driver Compatibility
>General Performance Troubleshooting

Literally not worth the hassle.

No, literally worth the hassle.

Only on ps4 and nintendo switch, i'm playing shadow of tomb raider in 60 fps here just fine on my xbox one x

But thats a paused screen,it runs fine on my end user. Is boost mode even enabled on that test?

Stop being poor? Or save up?

PC can't run games on GPU alone.
If consoles would cost 1000$ you would play games at high setting and framerate on them too.
You can't compare things for 250$ with things that cost 4 times more.

No, it's not.

I can't count how many times I sat down to my "rig" excited to play a new game or something only to have to waste 40+ minutes trying to sort out some sort of shitty glitch or performance hitch. The majority of the time, consoles "just werk" and that's so important to me.

here you go
youtube.com/watch?v=4ORVwS377Ck
Depending on the area it goes from 28 to 40.

Meanwhile the base PS4 runs at 30 with few drops to 28-29
youtube.com/watch?v=tkB8gpPzMkw
So the PS4 is definitely comparable to 9 year old hardware.

>Owning a no games X
Why?

Attached: 79af8969c1127f1816d1b5270a0e9ea5.jpg (225x350, 16K)

>no other specs like CPU and RAM
>So the PS4 is definitely comparable to 9 year old hardware
You posted only GPU that is not even 9 years old.

Macfag-tier incompetence.

youtube.com/watch?v=rrzp_fS1GRY

>paying $500 for a console that underperforms a PC that costs 1/3 less
Yikes.

Attached: 1543717231252.jpg (348x383, 67K)

>frame drop
Look at the god damn chart, it consistently runs around 40. This isn't a single drop.
Or just look at the posted video and you'll notice this entire minutes long sequence is around 40.
youtu.be/xepW3bAyeeI?t=109
That's not what a frame drop is.

If wasn’t poor I could afford an awesome car and would bang sluts all day. Video games are a hobby of the poor

Pilled and basedred

Attached: 1507321697176.jpg (673x559, 81K)

>even if console had an i9 and a 2080 ti devs would still make the games run at 30fps for grafix
This

Its an intentional decision, any game could be 60fps if the devs/publisher wanted it to while working within the limitations of the hardware they're developing for, they just prioritize visuals because it sells more copies

No, that's just how it fucking works
>Sit down to your PC
>Turns out your graphics driver has been updated
>New patch for a new Pc game is incompatible with the new drivers
>Have to spend a few minutes on google, searching out similar cases and solutions
>Might have to download and re-install an older version of drivers
>Might have to dig into .ini files for the game or advanced graphics driver settings
>Have to start up the game and see if the fixes worked
It's a waste of my time and sanity.

I've been building and playing PCs for over 15 years and that has never, ever, ever happened to me. Not once.

Consoles have given me problems. PCs have given me non-gaming-related problems. But I have never not been able to just sit down at my computer, load a game, and play. Can't say the same for consoles.

Just cheking my points.
Alright, in 3 hours I've been away I've won more than 100 points. How the fuck?Coin Flip: Heads

>I've been building and playing PCs for over 15 years and that has never, ever, ever happened to me. Not once.
Fuck off with your lies user. PC Gaming and times wasted on troubleshooting and settings tweaking go hand in hand.

>hurr durr how do I read the RTSS OSD or look in the video description durr
Based retard

Attached: drrrp.png (158x130, 37K)

>Consoles have given me problems.
What consoles and what problems maybe we can help you out friendo

And 10 more in the span of one post.
I don't understand.🐱

>The majority of the time, consoles "just werk" and that's so important to me.

>PS2
>Buy game
>Put disc in
>Play game

>PS4
>Buy game
>Put disc in
>System update
>50GB download because half the game isn't on the disc
>Mandatory install because blu-ray read speeds are shit
>Another 5-20GB day-one update
>Play 5 hours later
>Still $50 worth of "DLC" to buy

lol they just werk :^)

May as well just play on PC at this point if you have to do all this bullshit anyway

>PC Gaming and times wasted on troubleshooting and settings tweaking go hand in hand
You'll only need to troubleshoot if you're retarded. Tweaking settings for best graphics and performance is not "time wasted" and you don't even need to do it. Set the preset to medium if you're not sure you can run high/ultra and don't bother customising every single setting to get the best out of your PC.

>lol they just werk :^)
Yes. Those patches aren't anything but a time waster. I don't have to figure out the problems or solve them myself. I just have to chill out and go have a wank while the patch downloads and installs to my console.

PC asks me to wait around, waste time AND put in work. Consoles just work every time with the worst thing being the occasional wait for a game install.

Title says 4k,do you get 4k 60fps with your specs user?

Attached: 1552387419085.jpg (350x389, 22K)

>Bloodborne: 30
>The Order 1886: 30
As fucking if. Genuinely play below the threshold of motion.

>aaaa I have to make decisions and use like 0.2% of my brain
Literal brainlet.

>buying 2 cores when 4 cores are already bottlenecked
For the same price you can prolly buy a used i5 sandy/ivy.

>Tweaking settings for best graphics and performance is not "time wasted"
Yes it is. The machine is for playing games. Time spent on it not gaming is a waste.
>Set the preset to medium
You buy and play on PC to get "the best". Medium is not even close to "the best". Sounds like I should just save some time and money and play on a PS4. PS4 easily matches up to "medium" settings on any game.

Choosing the right settings once you're in game, sure. I'll give you that. You do have to spend a minute or two, the first time you start a game, to pick the right graphics settings for your computer and your tastes.

But that's a one-time process, and most games follow mostly the same graphics "levels" idea.

Consoles don't even give you the option to say "I want better visuals" or "I want better performance", it's just fuck you, you get what we give you. That's for cuckolds. And I say that as someone who spent probably several thousand hours playing Xbox 360.

Broken updates, broken games, crashing, red ring of death (might be before your time), total lack of control over anything so if the manufacturer doesn't fix it you're just fucked.

Consoles are a more expensive, locked-down, lower performance, louder, less enjoyable experience than PC.

Are consoles fun? Sure. But are PCs better for gaming? Yes, in every way.

That video's pretty old so yeah, today I'd just get something like an i3-8100 or Ryzen 3 2200G for the processor.

>Q9550
This is 9yr old hardware to you? You realize you made a retard of yourself not me?

>Title says 4K
Because the youtube video is 4K footage of a game running at "4K"(checkerboard upscaling). And that's only at "resolution" mode which runs at 30. Any semi-decent GPU can run at checkerboard 4K 30 FPS.
The PS4Pro GPU is literally worse than a GTX 780.

But gow does run at 60fps on 1080p.

t somebody who played it

Attached: 1543134772140.gif (550x550, 277K)

>update, download
Nope, you can play it offline also system updates are rare.

>it consistently runs around 40
No, it doesn't. It runs more at 60fps massive amount of time.

>Consoles don't even give you the option to say "I want better visuals" or "I want better performance"
Yes they do. That's EXACTLY what the PS4 Pro and Xbox 1 X have been doing for awhile now.
>But that's a one-time process, and most games follow mostly the same graphics "levels" idea.
Except every game is different. I might be able to swing "Ultra" on my shadows for one game and only "Medium" for shadows on another one. PC Gaming is a total shitshow like that. I've had games where I could handle fully maxed out settings but only if I went in and toggled exactly one or two things down to "Low" or "Off". This is a process that you must go through for EVERY game. And it has to be repeated any time a game undergoes a significant patch or your PC's Drivers undergo a change.

Name them

But it is faster in everything except single core CPU speed

>Broken updates
What game?
broken games
What game?
crashing
See above
ring of death (might be before your time),
That’s what you get for buying M$ shit total lack of control over anything so if the manufacturer doesn't fix it you're just fucked. This applies to every piece of consumer electronics everywhere.
>Consoles are a more expensive locked-down, lower performance, louder, less enjoyable experience than PC.
Did you buy a Neo-Geo gold?

You're right, A Q9550 is 11 years old, not 9. Not that it makes much of a difference.
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/33924/intel-core-2-quad-processor-q9550-12m-cache-2-83-ghz-1333-mhz-fsb.html

You can't launch the game if huge chunks aren't on the disc

You're going to get bugs, performance issues and crashes without day-one patches because the disc shipped without those too

Why can't you just accept that consoles are crappy PCs now? None of what I said isn't true.

>PS4 Pro isn't PS4
wew nice mental gymnastics

pretty much this

>Except every game is different... PC Gaming is a total shitshow like that.
Spending 1-2 minutes to choose the right graphics settings, once, is a shitshow? Really?

>This is a process that you must go through for EVERY game.
Do you also have a problem with brushing your teeth every night, or shaving in the morning?

>And it has to be repeated any time a game undergoes a significant patch or your PC's Drivers undergo a change.
Well, I definitely believe you're a console gamer now because that's simply false. Game patches VERY rarely have major influences on performance, and when they do
>go into settings, turn the graphics up a little
Wow.

>or your PC's drivers undergo a change
GPU drivers VERY rarely have a major impact on performance. And when they do...
>go into settings, turn the graphics up a little
Wow.

Consolefaggots' complaints about PC gaming are rooted in, literally, nothing but fanboyism and cuckoldry. You might even call it stockholm syndrome. And remember, you have to pay for the privilege of playing online. That's a real cuck move right there, you gotta admit.

I haven't played consoles in nearly a decade, and I'm not going to start anytime soon because again, I'm not a cuckold.

It absolutely 100% is significantly more powerful than PS3/360, why are you shitposting? The Wii U was more powerful and the Switch is more powerful than the Wii U. PS3/360 could barely run vanilla Skyrim and Dark Souls, Switch runs them at native 1080p, with better visuals and performance. D44M wouldn't fucking run on either of those consoles, but with heavy concessions it runs on the Switch.

>I haven't played consoles in nearly a decade,
So you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about.

>mental gymnastics
Apparently recognizing the difference between 2 different sets of hardware requires mental gymnastics now.

Attached: ayy.png (835x939, 1.09M)

>Spending 1-2 minutes to choose the right graphics settings, once, is a shitshow? Really?
It takes more than 1-2 minutes to check how each setting is impacting performance and examine how the resulting performance and visual changes are impacting your experience.
>Do you also have a problem with brushing your teeth every night, or shaving in the morning?
If owning a console over a PC saved me all that time on daily hygiene? You can bet I'd choose console.
>Well, I definitely believe you're a console gamer now because that's simply false.
Nah, you're just like every PC fanboy and don't want to acknowledge all the shitty realities of PC gaming.
>GPU drivers VERY rarely have a major impact on performance
Wrong. Incompatibility can outright break a game's ability to function. They even sometimes break entire features like post-processing or whatever else.
>Consolefaggots' complaints about PC gaming are rooted in, literally, nothing but fanboyism and cuckoldry.
No, that's easily you, not me. Know why? I'm not a fanboy and I know exactly what kind of drawbacks PC gaming has. This entire exchange has just been you ignoring and shaking your head at every problem PC gaming has. Like a fanboy.

>Yes they do. That's EXACTLY what the PS4 Pro and Xbox 1 X have been doing for awhile now.
WOW! I can choose to spend $900 on TWO of the same console to get slightly better performance!

SO AWSUM XD

>Wrong. Incompatibility can outright break a game's ability to function. They even sometimes break entire features like post-processing or whatever else.
Imagine living in 2006. And you have zero knowledge about what drivers actually do.
>It takes more than 1-2 minutes to check how each setting is impacting performance and examine how the resulting performance and visual changes are impacting your experience
Not if you have even the slightest knowledge about your GPU and what graphics settings do. A hardware monitoring software with an OSD like RTSS can easily tell you when your GPU is struggling or running out of VRAM, it takes a minute to nail down which settings to change.

>WOW! I can choose to spend $900 on TWO of the same console to get slightly better performance!
No. You can buy exactly ONE console and then choose to direct it's power towards performance, resolution or raw graphics. Any title that PS4 Pro or XB1X Enhanced means it has a setting where you can go in and choose "Performance" or "Graphics" or whatever the devs want. Nioh had a ton of choices for exampl and didn't even limit it to PS4 Pro only. Even a basic PS4 had these options available.

>Team Ninja games have traditionally focused on sleek, polished visuals, a fast frame-rate and fluid animation but Nioh takes things further by offering players a selection of options to tailor your experience. There are three gameplay modes available here - action mode, movie mode and a variable movie mode. Action mode focuses on delivering 60 frames per second at the expense of image quality, movie mode is instead capped at 30fps with a priority on resolution while variable mode tries to find a middle ground. All three options are available on both PS4 and the PS4 Pro.

>Cousin brings over his PS4
>Download speeds are absolute shit (I'm talking sub-50 Mbps on a gigabit connection, even my fucking phone can hit 120 Mbps and it's half a decade old)
>Games run like shit and look mediocre
>Even "heavy-hitters" like GoW looked mediocre (legit looked like modded Skyrim) on a $900 4k TV
>Media capabilities are fucking dogshit, internet browser is 2010 Android-tier, any form of streaming has more macroblocking than my Shield
>He's already gone through 3 controllers in 2 years
>Pretty much every game he owns is already on PC
>Doesn't even own any splitscreen games because console devs who aren't named Nintendo don't make those anymore
Serious question, what the fuck is even the point of these machines?
They are LITERALLY just shittier PCs.
At least my Nvidia Shield can use Mobdro so I don't have to pay for cable (and don't mention Bluestacks, it sucks dick).

Clearly superior

Attached: AB70E326-55F9-404D-8EAF-835FC3696FDC.jpg (1024x705, 177K)

>it takes a minute to nail down which settings to change.
No because each setting has 5 different intensity levels and you have too manually test and check them all. Even worse if the game is one of those "Game must restart for changes to take effect" shitshows.

>mfw own both ps4pro and an okay PC
>mfw i can play anything i want
>mfw i only see autists arguing about meaningless shit
Theres more false information in this thread than truth.

Your fortune: You will meet a dark handsome stranger

Attached: 1544389642942.png (311x311, 54K)

What are those images in the middle? Everything else is good taste, but those confuse me.

>So you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about.
And I don't plan on paying more than I would for a more powerful computer, to have a worse experience and give up control.

Oh and pay for the privilege to play online. Please master don't ban me, uwu, otherwise I'll be cucked out of my games and my money.

>It takes more than 1-2 minutes to check how each setting is impacting performance and examine how the resulting performance and visual changes are impacting your experience.
If you have extremely severe autism, maybe.

>the shitty realities of PC gaming.
Like what? Give me actual examples. Prove your point. "Because fuck you I said so" is not an argument.

>Incompatibility can outright break a game's ability to function
15+ years and I can count on one hand the number of times I wasn't able to run a game, and each of those cases was trying to run something from 10+ years prior. Consoles can't even run games from the previous generation, let alone a decade ago.

>They even sometimes break entire features like post-processing or whatever else.
Examples. Post proof. You have to offer something other than "because I said so".

>I'm not a fanboy and I know exactly what kind of drawbacks PC gaming has.
While wholesale choosing to ignore the *glaring* problems with console gaming. PC gaming is far from perfect, and I never even got close to implying it was, but it is objectively better than console gaming. And I mean that in every way, unless you are a literal braindead monkey who has trouble finding the "escape" key and opening the options.

You have to be a stupid fanboy ape nigger to think consoles are better than PC.

Attached: 1543687811277.png (1000x1000, 261K)

>it costs money to use less graphics

>You can buy exactly ONE console
Oh cool, so I can not play anything for four years and wait for the slightly more powerful revision that may not even come?

Sounds GREAT!

You're a fucking moron.

>If you have extremely severe autism, maybe.
No point in wasting money on fancy hardware if you aren't trying to squeeze the utmost from it. Don't undermine the main reason why PC is appealing just to counter the main drawbacks.

>Each setting has 5 different intensity levels and you have to manually test and check them all
Literal brainlet.
If you're not retarded you won't have to brute-force every possible setting combination.

> Somebody criticized my favorite thing! He must think OTHER thing is better!
Typical fanboy reaction.

>mfw I both own a big wheel AND an automobile
>mfw I ride my big wheel to work instead of the objective superior automobile because I like being a retarded mongoloid

PS4 is the worst PS console, fewer exclusives than any past PS console, more ports and re-releases than any past PS consoles, paid online, mandatory installs for every game, massive updates because no one ships finished games anymore, why the fuck would I want this? Why are consoles going BACKWARD?

Attached: 932-derp-sheen.jpg (401x373, 81K)

He cute

>No point in wasting money on fancy hardware
You mean spending less than you would on a console for a stronger, actually upgradable machine?

>if you aren't trying to squeeze the utmost from it
Again, this is an extremely simple process. Even a particularly stupid monkey can do it. It goes like this:
>What maximum performance? Turn graphics settings to minimum.
>What maximum visuals? Test "medium" preset, see if it runs at an acceptable frame rate, adjust accordingly.
A process that takes, at the outside, a few minutes.

>getting angry because someone said consoles are worse
t. you

But wait, what criticisms were there for PC? The only one I've seen that holds any water at all is "you have to open the options menu as many as 3 times to set the graphics settings appropriately". And that's not really a strong argument, is it?

Attached: 1547962015045.jpg (395x401, 59K)

it has more vram and easier to program that is about it

>The Order 1886: 30
the order when I played it had amazing frame pacing @ 30 on most of it which made it look 60 almost

>mfw I ride my big wheel to work instead of the objective superior automobile because I like being a retarded mongoloid
You could emulate those games,thats cool too. I only play exclusives on ps and everything else on pc. Please think before you post user.

Attached: 1554119510164.png (586x634, 284K)

Then why does virtually every 360/PS3 port look and run significantly better? Again, games like Skyrim and Dark Souls run at higher native resolutions and have noticeably better textures and visuals in general.

>You mean spending less than you would on a console for a stronger, actually upgradable machine?
It's been shown time and time again, you cannot build a $400-500 4K PC. PS4 Pro and Xbox One X can do 4K for that price however

>PS4 Pro Performance
thats the 1080

>ou're going to get bugs, performance issues and crashes without day-one patches because the disc shipped without those too
Nope, played many games, patches fixes many thing but none of them was unplayable. Your argument about forceful download was untrue and stupid.

>I only play exclusives on ps

And you're getting fewer than any other past Playstation console. It has like 20 exclusives. PS4 is the worst console Sony has ever produced in terms of games and exclusive content.

Overwatch, Doom, Devil May Cry, Tekken, Soul Calibur etc.

You could absolutely build a 2k-upscaled/30fps PC for under $500.

Or if you arent a brainlet all that comes as second nature and you have more control over your outcome.

None of those are exclusives user.

It's not and alone cost more than than a whole console, you just shoot at your own foot user.

>2K 30fps
Those are 4K 60 fps machines

>PS4 Pro and Xbox One X can do 4K for that price however
Running upscaled 4K at sub-30 FPS is not what I would consider "4K capable".

But you know what, I'm open to this challenge. I'll make a build video and benchmarks for a 4K console killer meme PC. I run a youtube channel, and I'm gonna do this. Of course I can't link it here because of naughty language used in this thread, but watch for the video to show up in a few weeks here.

You are wrong, and I am going to prove it.

>>New patch for a new Pc game is incompatible with the new drivers
Consolefags are so stupid that it's almost impressive.

No, they're not.

>It has like 20 exclusives
Please stop posting until you get things right. Even if that was the case,how many games do you play on your PC? You could even play one right now instead of spreading false information.

Attached: 1541056445682.jpg (570x570, 29K)

The casual Conshit market will move to stadia if it doesn't suck, Nintendo and PlayStation fanboys and the dumb Weebs will buy consoles forever, me? I like owning my games and playing offline

>textures
>resolutions
>vram

30 fps gives me a headache, console games play the same as Deal or No Deal the DVD game

If you think frame pacing can make 30 look like 60 you've never played a game with good frame pacing at 60 or are blind.

And sky is blue. Your point?

Who do you think you're fooling?

>and alone cost more than than a whole console

Attached: Screenshot_2019-04-01 intel Q9550 eBay.jpg (924x8036, 1.43M)

>yessssss please fuck my ass oh anthem you are so pretty on my PS4

well I did say almost, and bad frame pacing can make 30 look 15 like bloodborne

>preowned
I've seen 11 year old entire consoles preowned on ebay that cheap

If consoles are 30 fps, how am I playing Smash Ultimate in my lap at 60 fps right now?

>Dwarf fortress
>Csgo
>LoL
>Dota
>huniepop
All in glorious 4K 120fps jealous console plebs.

I literally linked Intel's own page which clearly states its launch date was Q1 08. Which is a bit more than 11 years ago. In case you weren't aware, we're currently in Q2 of 2019.
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/33924/intel-core-2-quad-processor-q9550-12m-cache-2-83-ghz-1333-mhz-fsb.html
Here's the link again, try reading this time
>cost more than a whole console
Reccomended Customer Price: $287. That was 11 years ago, on release.

>Y-y-yeah, well...what do YOU play on your PEE-CEE!?!?!?
lol, fucking moron, moving the goalposts when called out

Sorry bub, PS2 had dozens upon dozens upon dozens of exclusives. PS4 s a fucking dumpster fire compared to GOAT PS2.

Not that it matters but that video says i5-4460

I think you mean 13-12 year old consoles.

>used
Full Metal Retard.

>Expecting to be able to buy an 11 year old processor new.
Are you retarded?

You can parrot memes all you want, the games look and run significantly better. PS3/360 have fucking 15 year-old tech in them, just fucking stop.

okay but do they perform like a ps4?

I own a PC to play everything.
The only reason for me to own a console is for exclusives, since they're shit at everything else.
It's an 11 year old part that's been out of production since before your balls dropped, not sure what the issue is.

On console their subpar performance makes them turn on motion blur so you don't see how bad the models in motion look (No AA) on PC usually the only thing that gets turned off is motion blur that's why I can screen shot my games at any point of motion and it look the same where as on console you have to be at a stand still for the game to look it's best

theres no way to test what an xbox 360 can do with more vram but i would be willing to bet the textures could be better. as for dark souls it was improved to run much better in problem areas even on potato pc's and still is only "30" fps on switch just like 360

Most devs are lazy.
The MCC was able to increase framerates to 60 while making them each 4k HDR, meanwhile Ubisoft just released AC3 remastered and it's still 30fps, and it actually looks worse than the original and parts.

Why do Switch owners lie about its performance? It runs most of its games like shit with res scaling

you're are dumb ass 30 fps is 30fps no matter 30hz or 60hz no matter the program and my eyes can feel and see the chug when I lock windows to 30fps, if you don't feel that when trying to move a character in a game then congrats you are a console peasant

I mean most of the steam player base uses a quad core i5 and GTX 1060 and that shits on all the consoles

It uses a shitty laptop jaguar APU that was bad even for it's time.

because prettier graphics are a bigger selling point than higher frame-rate to the majority of consumers on consoles. On PC you can play at higher frame-rate because you can buy a more powerful Cpu and Gpu than actually needed to run the game and thus be able to play at higher fps and resolution.

Now does this sound too complicated for you?

Attached: 986643.jpg (355x265, 29K)

classic PlayStation crackhead, can you play demon souls on that PS4? I can on my PC

>as for dark souls it was improved to run much better in problem areas even on potato pc's
PTDE still has frame drops in problem areas, you can just brute-force past some of it because its a PC. And I'm comparing 360 and Switch anyway, not PC. Its native 1080p on Switch with slightly better textures and effects and has few frame drops. And it was handed off to some no-name chunk studio that has made nothing but ports, it wasn't handled by the same team who did the other three versions of the game. I think it turned out fine given what its running on and who ported it. And, again, look at Skyrim. Pretty sure its using the re-release as a base, and obviously it doesn't look or run as nice as it does on PS4/Xbone its significantly better than 360/PS3.

No one is lying about it. Its a tablet. But its still a tablet that's more powerful than the PS3, 360 and Wii U. The games and performance speak for themselves.

Whats the issue here? PS4 still has exclusives and I wanted to play a lot of them. So I got a ps4pro. I can afford it and it runs those games just fine. If I want to play any current fotm online games or anything that runs better on PC then i will switch back.
As I said,I play on both and Im perfectly fine and happy with it.
Thats exactly what I've been saying the whole time,reading comprehension sure is hard.

Cinematic experience

>Whats the issue here?
PS4 is the worst PS console. If you're fine with Sony not living up to the standards they themselves set that's fine but don't pretend everyone who doesn't agree is somehow fucking crazy. PS2 had mountains of niche exclusives in many genres, PS4 absolutely pales in comparison.

>PTDE
I meant the remaster, it runs better in Blighttown etc on old pc's that couldnt get past 30

>PS4 is the worst PS console
But it STILL has exclusives hello? Can you run them on your ps2? It doesn't matter if ps2 has more exclusives if I can't play THOSE SPECIFIC GAMES on it.

Attached: 1540733546426.png (302x496, 84K)

You're right PS4 has like 10, I get all the weeb games like Yakuza, Neir and Noih, too you are aware? Let alone the fact the PS4 emulator will be out eventually allowing me to actually play bloodborne at 60fps

besides my point was that it is more powerful, but most of it is down to the increased ram and newer architecture, not raw processing. Dark souls is still 720p on portable which is the only reason you would play it on a switch. Also I notice you said looks and runs much better, didnt mention sounds HAHAHAHA fucking gottem nice audio bro

the PS2 had a monopoly with 3rd party devs tho, so don't expect that to happen ever again.

The Xbone also technically has some exclusives that haven't been ported to UWP microsoft store. Are you going to buy that too?

used parts are cheap parts retard, i got a 1080ti for 400$ and that bitch already crushes the 600$ PS5, you can buy used consoles too you know

>monopoly with 3rd party devs
And they didn't have to pay a single cent to most of them.
Porting was a lot harder back then so consoles had tons of "free" 3rd party exclusives. Nowadays only super retarded companies keep their titles exclusive unless they're being paid to.

Probably not,theres nothing on there that interests me.
>You're right PS4 has like 10
Literally look it up on wikipedia. I know you are baiting but I will bite since most of you can't read anyways.

Attached: 1554122536214.jpg (699x720, 63K)

I refunded the "remaster" on Steam, I still got frame drops in addition to some stuttering that wasn't there in the original. And no PVP watchdog to boot cheaters.

Saw no reason to keep it when I still had PTDE, and the fact that almost as many people are still playing the delisted PTDE as the re-release tells me I made the right call. I bought it for Switch when it finally came out just because it was portable, and yes I'm disappointed its 30fps.

PS4 is the worst PS console.
Not the ps3

Attached: 97BC84A8-C19E-4E5D-AD04-E9854121844A.jpg (630x930, 129K)

Idiots continue to spend ridiculous amounts of money on 30 FPS games and consoles. As long as the companies continue to make shitloads of money, they have no reason to improve.

>It STILL has like 10 exclusives instead of dozens upon dozens!
>HELLO!?

lol I hope you're just fucking around

Half the "exclusives" aren't exclusive. Re-releases like SOTC aren't exclusive.

Literally all the consoles run opengl or Vulkan it's quite sad that these plebs think "console optimization" is some sort of magic it bet they just use the PC version with a quick UI swap then just hide the options menu, I bet a port could be made and tested in 2 weeks

.

spend ridiculous amounts of money on 30 FPS games and consoles.
You mean the only reason you have games to play and ports to beg for.

give me 10 games not made by Sony Interactive Entertainment that I can't get somewhere else

In terms of actual games and exclusive content, yes. PS3 has more and more varied exclusives by the end of its life. PS3 was a dumpster fire of a console much like the N64, bad design decisions left and right, but it still had more and better exclusive games than the PS4 does despite being a foolishly-design console.

youtube.com/watch?v=6NH1iIL4Q3o PS3 makes the best games

Oh no, whatever would we do if not for consolefags spending $20 billion every year on the latest shitty AAA games and buying up all the microtransactions they can in Fifa and Fortnite?
Truly this industry would be lost without the direction of consoleGODS.

not correct
correct and based

every 3rd party game on Xbone and on the GC were complete flops. So you either made for games for the PS2 or your studio went bankruptcy. The few games that were ported to Xbox like MGS and GTA was because MS paid for them. Even Nintendo tried doing something similar with certain Capcom games but the sales were so poor they ended up annulling the contract and porting the likes of Viewtidul Joe and RE4 to PS2. At that time Sony had the industry by the neck.

>Steam has over 130 million active users, 50K fromsoft fanboys signed a petition to buy bloodborne
Why are you being racist, I didn't sign and if a company doesn't want free money then I can't help them

Ps4 isn’t done and the Ps3 has a very long life span.

Console optimization 101:
Real AA is expensive so just blur everything with FXAA
Set very aggressive LOD distances so screenshots of textures up-close look decent but anything at a distance looks like ass
Intentionally introduce input lag to render multiple frames at once with a flip/render queue and improve multithreaded performance
Add a ton of motion blur to hide the shit framerate

If all else fails, just outright lie about the framerate your game runs at(say it runs at unlocked 60 when it hovers around 40), console plebs will eat it up.

Attached: kill it with poision gas.gif (487x569, 205K)

>PS3
>bad
It started off with hardware BC. It sold with things like the HDD, bluray, Wifi, and built in batteries already included. It tried to raise the bar for acceptable console prices. Only downfall was the cell. Raising the bar for acceptable console prices is the most important of all that though. Console prices have stagnated which means performance is just going to get worse between consoles and PCs. You shouldn't be able to buy things for the same price you could 20 years ago. A healthy economy has inflation.

Yeah man the 5 games I own on origin are just gonna delete themselves if EA goes under

It’s not the consoles, it’s the developers lack of using the hardware properly

"It's devs vision for their game to run like dogshit!"
Why do I get Hairworks then and you get forced updates

trash

Why u so mad bro? Did I hit nerve

Google it already,this is the last (you) you will get from me.

what are some highly praised current gen games with bad framerates on consoles?

Attached: 1413684195782.webm (720x540, 2.96M)

fucking owned. what a faggot.
This is what happens when your idea of fun is playing console COD while vaping 6 hours a day.

Pretty sure you quoted the wrong post bro.

Strategy games, turn-based games and movie games as 30fps are fine.
However who would play games like Sekiro where timing and reaction is everything at anything but 144fps?

Sauce, please!

Pretty much all highly praised current gen games have terrible framerates on console.

The pro consoles still use shitty retard laptop APUs from 2013 or so, they're nowhere near a mid range PC, my boy.

>PS4 isn't done
Sony sure seems to think it is, because its not getting any more exclusives from them. It'll keep getting multiplats of course, but there's nothing new and exclusive announced for it and PS5 is coming pretty soon.

PS3 stuck around for a decade because it lost literal billions of dollars due to being sold at a massive loss for several years. Sony lost $250+ on every single unit sold at launch, they went from being worth ~$80 billion in 2002 to ~$8 billion in 2012.

>raising the acceptable console price
See above, it tanked early due to its prohibitively-high price tag. You can't loss-lead with console hardware.

Pretty much everything not made by Nintendo, yeah. Only recent huge Nintendo game I can think of that got tons of praise and attention that's 30 is Zelda. Mario, Splatoon, Smash, Mario Kart, all 60 IIRC.

>JRPGs don't exactly need a high framerate.
Yes they do, how the fuck else are you supposed to get criticals, dumbass?

Fpbp

This is fucking pathetic. Consolelards make me sick.

The XboneX has a GPU that's around an RX 480. The CPU is still hot garbage, but with some lower settings it should be more than enough for 1080p/60 FPS.
But they went for the checkerboard 4K meme instead.

Because you want them to push graphics to the best possible clarity while also selling them for 300 dollars.

That's a bunch of horseshit, the reason why the downsized so horribly was because their movie studios tanked something fierce. They still produce nothing but trash to this day. Also their computer business shut down, along with their mobile devices, and their consumer electronics weren't doing exactly stellar. The ONLY side of the company that was making a profit was SCE. That 250 per console figure you pulled out of your ass.

Yeah, but would you say it's comparable to a mid range PC today? Because it seriously fucking isn't.

For the same reason they have paid p2p online: console users are dumb and easy to deceive.

They are the same crowd that hyped up obvious bullshit such as "the power of the cloud" and that will buy and rate games based on their aggressive marketing. It's extremely easy to sell trash to such a braindead group of consumers.

The GPU can be said to be midrange unless you want to claim the 2060/1070 are midrange and everything else is low-end. But $350 is a bit high for "midrange".
Everything else is budget-tier or worse. Since RAM prices came down newer CPUs+motherboard and RAM are pretty affordable and even an entry-level R3 is far better than the tablet garbage in the XboneX.

So overall it's comparable to a budget-end "gaming" laptop with an OK GPU. So yeah, definitely not a midrange PC, but still enough for the promises they made with the 8th gen consoles(1080p/60fps).

>That's a bunch of horseshit
I didn't say the PS3 was the sole reason it happened, now did I? It was a major contributing factor but obviously Sony had their heads jammed firmly up their collective asses and many of their other divisions were tanking at the same time.

>That 250 per console figure you pulled out of your ass.
Oh you sweet, sweet ignorant moron.

>tomshardware.co.uk/ps3-teardown,news-22818.html
>arstechnica.com/gaming/2006/11/8239/
All teardonws have the PS3 at around $850 to manufacture at launch, with the difference between the $500 and $600 models being insignificant. Sony actually lost more on the $500 models, which is why they were promptly discontinued. 360 sold at a loss too, but not nearly as large and not for nearly as long. But of course MS also had to replace millions and millions of consoles.

>cnet.com/news/report-ps3-design-cost-finally-nearing-break-even/
ALMOST breaking even three years later, after redesigning and cutting costs and features with a slim model.

Attached: 1530651710773.png (960x576, 28K)

>Sony lost $250+ on every single unit sold at launch, they went from being worth ~$80 billion in 2002 to ~$8 billion in 2012
The entertainment division (or whatever division it is called that the Playstation was housed under) actually had a tendency to be in the black. Shit like their camera division were actually the areas that tanked them. Try reading their financial reports rather than mimicking everything you read from other anons and halfassed "news" reporters.

>See above, it tanked early due to its prohibitively-high price tag
That probably helped but the lack of support due to convoluted architecture should be the majority of why it tanked. Notice that prices didn't change anything throughout its life. Instead, increased game support near the end is what revived it. It is a bit naive to think price is the driving factor of success since that has never been the case before.

Also, I wasn't saying that raising the price is a successful tactic. I'm saying it is something that benefits the consumer. If I went to a restaurant and ate a meal and didn't notice anything wrong, then they decide to raise the price so they can use chicken instead of cats, I win as a customer. Consoles are struggling due to their prices not rising with inflation. Let that shit rise and move the fuck on. If you can't afford an extra $200 for your consoles then maybe you seriously should consider a 2nd job...

What's wrong, no response after being BTFO?

Sony's game division lost billions according to their own financial reports
see

>I wasn't saying that raising the price is a successful tactic. I'm saying it is something that benefits the consumer

Attached: 1313545774399.png (400x593, 253K)

>using compression to make 15 fps look worse than it is
>not comparing two things that are rendered at the speed at which you are viewing it

>Consoles are struggling due to their prices not rising with inflation
You know what else isn't rising with inflation? Wages with which to buy your retardedly expensive consoles.

No one wants a $600 console, what the fuck? If they wanted to spend that much, they can, PCs existed and continue to exist.

Is that all you have, cockbreath? You were right about the console's loss, but the rest of it was wrong. Most of their businesses failed and you blamed it all on the PS3, you disgusting sack of diabetes.

>Buying a $600 console that's weaker than a $600 PC is crazy
>Buying a $400 console that's weaker than a $400 PC is A-OK
Explain this logic.

no I was mocking the people who act like this shit is rocket surgery

>People are willing to spend $400 or less but not $600+
Pretty simple, really.

$600 is too much, sorry bub. People don't want to spend more than half a grand on a console, this has been proven time and time again. Expensive consoles don't sell well. Enthusiasts would rather have a PC, normies who just want an affordable machine to play on don't want to pay that much, especially those in less-developed countries with lower average income.

But why is a $400 console OK when you can build a budget PC for $400 that outperforms it? And if you say "well, building a PC is work etc. etc." why wouldn't people who want higher-end hardware but are too stupid to build a PC buy $600 consoles?

this is newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814137392 pretty much a 1070 for 279 this is the performance you will likely see with the PS5 and building a system with the other 220 isn't hard but not ideal I'd say if you get this you'd wanna spend about 650$ total if you are getting a 1660ti, or go used as 1070s go for 200$ on ebay all day

>You know what else isn't rising with inflation? Wages with which to buy your retardedly expensive consoles.
Pic related.

Attached: 4dd6c939e5af3b0f7a05d42521f2f4c6.png (910x661, 91K)

consoles will become 600$ as smartphones are 1000$ now and people change them every 2 to 3 years, Sony wants that free money as you'll still only be getting the power of a 400$ PC, "ur gonna have that device for a long time, we need to provide the best hardware so we can deliver you the best experience we can"

what dumb shit happened in 2008?

Attached: cb8.png (1024x1024, 347K)

>why wouldn't people who want higher-end hardware but are too stupid to build a PC buy $600 consoles?
I can't speak for anyone else, but, again, its probably the price tag. $600 is a lot of money to spend on entertainment for a lot of people, and the audience for consoles is certainly not enthusiasts who prioritize hardware and performance over ease-of-use and price.

I'm just telling you what has been observed throughout the history of home game consoles. Expensive, high-end consoles typically don't sell very well.

I'm just waiting for Na'vi to see if it's any good. And Nvidia prices might drop by then too.
Somewhat recently upgraded my CPU to an R5 2600X along with the mobo and RAM so I'm good on that front.
But yeah, $650 for a fresh and decently future-proof build seems about right if you don't spend anything on aesthetic shit like RGB.

Aside from the global economy tanking nothing in particular, its just been slowly building. Poor and middle-class aren't gaining any ground but wealthy are getting wealthier.

This but unironically

Yes, lets ignore their ACTUAL financial reports because those CAN'T be more accurate than what a journalist spent 10 seconds scribbling down for attention.

Attached: Sony 2006.png (527x615, 121K)

Yeah but look at the inflation rate, the 700$ 3DO is like spending 1200$ on a bideobame console today, even the base PS3 at 499 USD would be 607 13 years later

I mean that graph comes straight from their operating income as reported by Sony themselves but okay lol

PS3 was sold at a ~$250 loss at launch, this is 100% true and nothing you say changes this fact.

Consoles are fucking weak, but thats where the customers are so oh well time to tone down our work

no matter how rich they get they will never be Rockefeller 1880 rich at 340 billion adjusted net worth

The same shit that they went back to doing soon after that dumb shit crashed the economy to begin with. Get ready for micro crashes on a normal basis since dumb rich people want to be parted with their money as long as they make short gains.

Point being expensive high-end consoles don't sell well, regardless of the reason. I'd speculate this is the case simply because the general audience for consoles cares more about affordability than they do hardware power, and those that do care probably don't want a console as their primary platform either. There isn't much of an audience for high-end consoles comparatively, enthusiasts seem to lean toward PCs as their primary platform and most console players seem to care more about price and games than anything else. If I don't have $600+ to spend on a PS3 it really doesn't matter how great or how powerful it is.

Rest in Piece the times when Sony devices had modern hardware

Attached: Sex beast.jpg (1020x832, 85K)

Sure, but in general the wealth gap has gotten larger and larger.

I hope AMD creates a Navi GPU that beats my 1080ti that isn't exorbitantly over priced like the 2080ti, it help stop GPU price inflation, but right now the low and mid end are flooded with good deals rn new and used

>comes straight from their operating income as reported
Umm... I literally just posted SONY'S financial report for 2006. It shows a POSITIVE 8.7 billion yen for games. How does that equate to negative ~240 billion? What other source are you using that is supposed to be more reliable then THE financial report?

That's Sony as a whole, the graph is specifically Sony's game division, says so right at the top

idk should be 24fps

>I literally just posted SONY'S financial report for 2006
FY2005-2006, before the PS3 launched?

WOW, why wouldn't massive PS3 losses be reflected there? I have no idea!

Not that I don't believe you, but never trust financial forms that are not reliably audited before investing in a company or it's product

Attached: MY MUNNY.png (1200x1184, 69K)

The South Sea company, at it's peak and adjusted for inflation was worth a bit over 4 trillion dollars. That's higher than the US national budget(3.8 trillion).
So glad bullshit like that isn't really possible anymore.

>That's Sony as a whole
Save some face and look again... I'll let you figure this one out on your own.

That's before the PS3 launched you fucking moron, of course they weren't losing money on the fucking PS2

Its FY2004-2005 and 2005-2006, before the PS3 had launched, he's just stupid

Theres no reason why next gen consoles can't easily achieve 4k 60 fps with the rumoured 12-14 TFLOP GPU they'll be sporting. Hell the xbox one x already achieves 4k60 at times in a bunch of games already like DMC5 with only a 6 TFLOP GPU. For other games like RDR2 which are native 4k60 on xbox one x in theory a doubling of the GPU power should also double the framerate at identical settings.

...

Unless they eat hundreds in losses on every unit sold its not happening

Native 4k30*

Yeah people talk about greed being a problem now but the Rich's private armies that they used to break up strikes could've defeated the US army at that time, it's quite a miracle they didn't take over (((or did they?)))

...

Lol the PS2 out sold the PS3 in 2006 and 7 I believe

Can already buy a 10 tflop GPU for $250 being the Vega 56. That's the price the xbox one x GPU (ex 580) sold for at MSRP. 7nm process should lower the price even further. The next gen consoles would be at least equivalent to gtx 1080 performance from last gen nvidia.

Look at your little chart again

>Years ended March 31 2005 and 2006

This is their report for the fiscal year ENDING MARCH 31, 2006, before the PS3 launched

>hrp drp TFLOPS
Ah, it's that time again just before a new console release when consoleplebs pretend to know how GPUs work. As soon as you bring up TeraFLOPS you've shown you know fuck all.
Those GPUs are supposed to play games, not mine cryptocurrency. FP16 performance isn't all that indicative of in-game framerate.

Unless AMD comes up with some good Navi bullshit they will not be bundling a 1080ti (1 .3tflops 699$ Jan 2017) in their 500$ consoles, GPU technology hasn't improve that much in the consumer space yet, it will be a vega 56 equivalent in those boxes unless they get a price hike

>Can already buy a 10 tflop GPU for $250 being the Vega 56
And that's already ~60% of the console's price, with absolutely nothing associated with manufacturing, shipping or retailer cuts taken into account

Its not going to happen unless they price it absurdly high like the PS3, eat losses, or both.

just dont be a brainlet, these are hardly drawbacks for any semi competent pc user

Are you done being fucking retarded now? Will you even respond again after being thoroughly and embarrassingly BTFO as a result of you not knowing how the fucking dates on financial reports work?

Shit literally "just werks" My XB1 crashed so much more than my PC does (because I can actually do my own proper maintenance and don't lose features I like like Xbox Snap (FUCK YOU MICROSOFT YOU TURNED MY VOICE ACTIVATED MEDIA HUB INTO A SHITTY CONSOLE) and steam updates and installs everything from to Direct X versions to intel drivers for you, and if you buy nvidia and install geforce experience like a brain let it can auto update for you, and since you have fast SSD storage they don't take like 2 hours to install

You can buy used consoles so I can buy used parts, I built a PC like 2 Weeks ago for 50$ with an FX 6300 AND A Radeon hd 7770 (the actual GPU in the XB1) shits easy if you watch a little tech youtube

Has anyone ever convinced someone with all this shit flinging and misinformation to switch to another platform?

Nigger going from an AMD card at 6 TFLOP in the xbox one x to a next generation AMD GCN architecture which has a card with higher floating point performance will always be a big performance jump

Are you dense? The xbox one x GPU was also $250 yet it was priced at $500 which was acceptable for a high end console and its selling well. Microsoft doesn't buy GPU from AMD at the retail price. In fact AMD doesn't make fuck all on the consoles and nvidia abandoned being in the PS4 because of that.

Fucking zoomers.

And the Xbone X sells/sold at a loss

>gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-06-15-xbox-one-x-selling-at-a-loss

Daily Reminder that the 8.6tflop R9 Fury X is about 20% Weaker than the 6.5 tflop GTX 1070 that came a year later

>literally says he didn't say they're selling at a loss

How dumb are you?

>Hell the xbox one x already achieves 4k60 at times in a bunch of games already like DMC5 with only a 6 TFLOP GPU.
DMC 5 uses checkerboard rendering, so it's more like 1792p at 60 FPS.

Because AMD architectures and Nvidia ones don't directly compare you dolt. Who is the one who knows fuck all now?

>Can already buy a 10 tflop GPU for $250 being the Vega 56.
No you can't.
>7nm process should lower the price even further.
7nm yields have been absolute shit, so literally the opposite is true.

>backtracking
It will be a performance hop, just like basically any upgrade would be. You know what else would be an upgrade from the 6 TFLOP AMD GPU? A 5.5 TFLOP 1660ti. So fuck off with this shit, FP16 and FP32 performance isn't very relevant.
A GTX 1080 with 8.9 TFLOPS FP16 is decently faster in games than a VEGA 56 at 10.5 TFLOPS.
At best you're getting ~1070 level performance in a very expensive console.
>Downclocked RX 480
>$250
The RX 480 was $200 new, it only ever went above that due to the crypto boom and that didn't affect consoles. And the XboneX still sold at a loss.

Attached: Just stop.gif (320x180, 277K)

AMD literally Sold the APUs that were in the Launch PS4 and XB1, for like 30$ a pop, then about 60$ for the ram and PCB, likely 15$ for the Case PSU and Bluray burner, and then they make a healthy profit and more selling your dumb ass Xbox live,if you are really interested in how the real world works, AMD used to just throw away the under performing chips that now live in consoles

>not knowing how the fucking dates on financial reports work?

You insult the guy but shouldn't you look at what you just wrote? Sony's fiscal year for 2006 runs from april 2005 to march 2006, aka before the release of the ps3. The graph shows 2006's numbers as 2005 and 2007's numbers as 2006. The graph is off by a year. Of course you knew that before insulting the other user right?

>Apples and oranges
200mph is 200mph whether its a GM or Ford motor they can be compared because you don't measure performance based on "horsepower" you measure performance based on results like 0-60 or back to computers FPS and render times

>Does this sell at a loss
>I don't like to answer it that way :^)

It sells at a loss, dude.

>lmgtfy.com/?q=Xbox One X sells at loss

Its hardly anything new, every Xbox console has sold at a loss

>the other user
Its you, don't try to save face.

Sony lost money on the PS3, it sold at a big loss.

how fucking retarded are you? why are you comparing amd to nvidia when their architectures and thus floating point performance can't be directly compared? going from a 6tflop current gen amd GCN based arch to a next gen GCN based arch at double the floating point performance will offer double the gaming performance in theory. don't talk about shit you don't understand.

and the rx 480 was $230 new for the 8gbps 8gb vram version. the 4gb version was $200. and the xbox one x GPU isn't an rx 480 it's a superior GPU hardware wise with more compute units and TMU's. in practice with the clock difference they should be about the same.

>will offer double the gaming performance in theory.
That's not how it works m8.
Even the 12 TFLOP Vega 64 that has over double the compute power of the RX 580 doesn't have double the performance, and never will.

Attached: perfrel_2560_1440.png (500x1090, 52K)

If Microsoft is losing money on the XB1X they are retarded as I can buy newer parts from AMD directly at consumer prices and build a more powerful system cheaper unless they really want me to believe that UHD Blu Ray drives are a 250$ part

This is an anonymous image board user. No need to save face by deflecting and pretending only 2 anons exist. You were wrong on something. Calm your ego and get over it.

>y-y-you were wrong...
>c-c-calm you e-ego...

What was I wrong about? Oh, right, nothing. You were the one presenting FY2005-2006 as if it had anything to do with the PS3 or losses incurred as a result.

>why is a laptop board bad at video games
gee i wonder⚾

they never talk about how badly that 2.13ghz Jaguar CPU bottlenecks that RX 480 equivalent, the X rivals the performance of a RX 470 at best

>will offer double the gaming performance
You are so fucking retarded holy shit.
Look at the R9 290X(5.6 TFLOPs) vs a VEGA 56(10.5 TFLOPS). The VEGA is around ~60% faster in games. Both are from AMD.
Get it through your dumb ass that compute performance doesn't directly relate to in-game framerates.
>Why are you comparing to Nvidia
To show you how stupid it is to try to measure gaming performance by compute performance. AMD's higher end cards have to pull double duty as gaming and prosumer compute cards so their compute performance is usually higher. This has nothing to do with Nvidia having "better" or "more efficient" TFLOPs or whatever consoletard bullshit.

Attached: kill-yourself-desu.png (255x326, 61K)

It may not sell at a loss now or may sell at a much smaller one two years later but it sold at a loss then 100%.

You're looking at it as an end-user. Its not just the cost of the parts. MS has to pay to make them, assemble them, create packaging and other accessories like the controller and cables, ship them, and whoever sells the console gets a sizable cut too.

You'd be surprised how many retards don't realize that these AMD parts are actually manufactured by Sony/MS (Foxconn) and not AMD.
They seriously think AMD is selling already-built APUs the same way an AIB partner buys a GPU or an OEM buys a specific part in bulk.

this post is so retarded no one should bother replying to it

Nobody was talking about nvidia being more efficient or better. You console retards need to stop talking about shit you don't understand.

And the best part is that this doesn't take into account the architectural improvements moving from Hawaii to Vega, so it's even LESS impressive when you consider the increased compute performance AND the more efficient architecture.
I hate how AMD seems to be attracting so many retarded consoleniggers with their pie-in-the-sky hype shit.

Also another annoying thing you keep doing is giving fiscal years as a range. It is just one year. FY2006 and FY2005 are in the annual report for FY2006.

>What was I wrong about?
>not knowing how the fucking dates on financial reports work?
You are misinterpreting how the dates work in Sony's financial report.

>you console retards
reading comprehension issues
>nobody was talking aabout nvidia being more efficient or better
Except the guy I was directly replying to.

Reading comprehension. Go back and read the reply chain again.

They are jaguar APUs they existed before the Xbox One was even a twinkle in Mr. Gates eyes, if Microsoft or Sony were actually in charge of the RnD like you're dumb ass thinks then they wouldn't put it on desktop PCs then "The AMD Jaguar Family 16h is a low-power microarchitecture designed by AMD. It is used in APUs succeeding the Bobcat Family microarchitecture in 2013 and being succeeded by AMD's Puma architecture in 2014. It is two-way superscalar and capable of out-of-order execution. It is used in AMD's Semi-Custom Business Unit as a design for custom processors and is used by AMD in four product families: Kabini aimed at notebooks and mini PCs, Temash aimed at tablets, Kyoto aimed at micro-servers, and the G-Series aimed at embedded applications. Both the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One use chips based on the Jaguar microarchitecture, with more powerful GPUs than AMD sells in its own commercially available Jaguar APUs"

Pretty sure paladins allow gyro but that's the only game I know that uses it

The analogy wasn't about speed, it was about wanting something inferior to something that is clearly superior. FPS is so much more important than graphics and resolution, just like a car with round wheels i so much better than a car with square wheels. Your probably contention is that fps isn't that important, while he would argue back that it is that important.

I'm not going to bother reading this post, but Jaguar as an architecture didn't launch until 2013.
You're clearly a dumbfuck console convert who doesn't know the difference between manufacturing and R&D because you never finished high school.

>why are you comparing amd to nvidia when their architectures and thus floating point performance can't be directly compared
>Can't be directly compared
translation: you can't compare AMD TFLOPs and Nvidia TFLOPs, they're somehow different!
This is a retarded conclusion, TFLOPs in general are not a good measurement of in-game performance.
Also explain to me how which is directly disputing consolefag arguments is somehow a "console retard" post.
I guess some people are just too stupid to read.

Attached: hehe.jpg (512x498, 42K)

Go away console nigger

OK, you got me. 6/10 bait, here's your (you).

Attached: (you).gif (480x336, 1.45M)

>because you never finished high school.
You're projecting James, that GED is so much better isn't? CPU architectures are evolved until they can no longer be used, it was called bobcat before jaguar, either way it's all been under powered parts for laptops. The fact you are defending a corporation's lies of selling their device at a loss instead of logic is just sad, Microsoft and Sony did not create or manufactured the parts in the PS4 and Xbox they bought them they are literally the same as Lenovo or HP building a laptop, they get ram from Samsung or Micron, they get the psu's and cases made probably somewhere in china. You're crazy if you think these aren't just cheap PC parts, Sony couldn't afford the billions AMD spends creating things like GCN

>I'm not going to bother reading this post
Well maybe if you did you'd notice the post already says the architecture launched in 2013.
Fucking idiot.

Attached: nepnep.jpg (1280x720, 94K)

Yeah they fuckin designed and built the consoles in 6 months am I rite? Even my clown ass knows Microsoft couldn't do that

Sony literally paid for Navi

Then why will they be releasing Navi GPUs to me before the PS5? Oh wait I'm beta testing it for Sony my bad, but wait why will it be in the Xbox then?

Attached: 1552510617773.jpg (999x1000, 287K)

We don't know if it's going to be in the xbox. We know that AMD was making navi for Sony. Maybe Microsoft decided to invest in their own semi custom GPU too. Its crucial for both these companies now that streaming is the future and backwards compatibility with all old hardware is a must.

Sony did basically fuck all for the development of Na'Vi as an architecture. All they really have stakes in is a lower-power chip that's customised for their console.
>Sony literally paid for Navi
This is just totally untrue. They paid for their own custom version, they have nowhere near the money required to actually fund AMD's R&D.

>mfw navi was supposed to be out already lol
I'm not gonna give a bite but I'll tell you this, there is no reason why every single PS4 game won't run on the PS5 since they both us opengl and vuklan as their APIs every game would run better out of the box too, but I bet they don't dispute how easy it would be because sony hates their consumers

Attached: AMD-GPU-Roadmap-Polaris-Vega-Navi.jpg (2560x1440, 442K)

>since they both us opengl and vuklan as their APIs
The PS4 actually uses GNM and GNMX.

>open gl
>vulkan
>ps4

U wot

Sony is worth 10B dollars more than the whole of AMD

That's actually pretty pathetic considering Sony is involved in
>Finance/Banking
>Insurance
>Movies
>Music
>Television shows
>Video games
>Image sensoring
>Television sets
>Monitors
>Sound equipment
>etc.

Compared to microprocessors and (some of) their related markets for AMD.

>mfw freeBSD is he PS4 OS
>mfw freeBSD supports opengl
GNMX is similar to direct x 11, meaning they are using the PC versions of 3rd party games on the PS4, meaning they would be easy ports day 1 by just reading the .exe and the stronger hardware would alleviate any differences in api overhead, all these things are open source anyways except the PS4 lol
Sony has a net worth of 10 billion less than AMD let alone all Sony does for the world is make gaming and movies worse whereas AMD challenges both the giants of Nvidia and Intel

>GNMX is similar to direct x 11, meaning they are using the PC versions of 3rd party games on the PS4, meaning they would be easy ports day 1 by just reading the .exe and the stronger hardware would alleviate any differences in api overhead
I really hope you didn't actually genuinely type all this tripe out.

Attached: 1339569361976.jpg (345x194, 19K)

>Sony is worth
>net worth matters
It's not about company net worth, it's about their budget. We're not talking about a buyout.

GNMX is an DX11 wrapper and is garbage. See DmC on ps4.

Tell me how I'm wrong tell me smarty pants how do I run direct X code on Linux despite it being "only" available on windows?

I bet it's garbage like the PS4 lol, I bet the system wastes 10% of it's power instead of just using DX11

He's right you know, Sony just wants you to buy your games all over again

Attached: 5b3b176e01fefb5e84aa304611917819.jpg (595x500, 55K)

Rolled 59 (1d100)

My roll is your IQ

tell me brain let how I'm wrong I don't think you understand that consoles are just PCs with inferior OSes and predatory scams spread throughout the OS like ads and paying for online, only those who fall for their propaganda think they are magic like you do, if it was too much work for devs they wouldn't port their games to the smaller (and generally dumber) markets that are the consoles, I could make a OS just like the PlayStation's in a day, I just wouldn't waste my time because it would be an inferior product since most people like open source and actual useful OSes, check this out, this is just normal PS4 running steam, youtube.com/watch?v=FlQlDaJWi8g

When you're so mad you just spew out run-on sentences.

Attached: hurhur.jpg (651x495, 70K)

>classic grammar nazi with no refutes
Maybe I'm doing other things besides proofreading the things I send to retards. Go watch more PS4 games, I got people who don't accept checker boarded 1800p at 30 frames as high end to talk to.
>inb4 "I was only pretending to be retarded"

Attached: 1446107174590.png (480x385, 107K)

Classic grammarlet with the "I wasn't even trying" excuse.
I spent 90% of this thread shitting on consoletards but then you come in and eclipse their collective retardation in a single post.

Attached: And post overused image macros.jpg (500x375, 69K)

You have yet to explain how GNMX doesn't run Direct X code. I don't care if you are Bill fucking Gates, you clearly don't know jack all about computers if you think I'm wrong. It's not an excuse I wasn't trying you nerd.

Attached: 1517083652674.jpg (227x294, 11K)

Because consoles are childrens toys and children don't know any better.

Attached: 1530096987740.jpg (600x600, 128K)