Tomb Raider Definitive PS4 edges out XB1 in performance.

what hapends when WatchDogs or Destiny is confirmed runing at 60 on ps4 and on xbox is 30fps

I was going to reply to another post as well with some useful thoughtful matter but this message editor is more broken than the suits who designed the Xbox One, or it doesn't support FireFox, Chrome, Internet Explorer very well.

Destiny confirmed 30, no confirmation on WD.

Personally cranky about DriveClub's 30 framerate because that shit belongs in the past, not what the framerate makes the game look like but what it does for the gameplay.

I don't see how this is surprising anyone, we knew this would be happening months before the consoles released. Basically just beating a dead horse again.

I was already on the fence, but now I think I will check out the Ps4 port.

Okay so i was originally in the "who gives a shit" crowd until i played Final Fantasy XIV on my PC for a month at 60fps, then tried to play the PS3 version when i was downloading stuff (runs at 27-30fps) and my god there is a massive difference! You can almost feel the game pulling itself along at 30 whilst as 60 it glides effortlessly, there are some games where this dosent matter but anything with a lot of high end graphics or a lot of action going on is going to suffer.

Why is this happening though? I thought Microsoft said they would easily keep up with the PS4 but thats now the 6th company who cant seem to push past 30 in a game, if it was just EA or Activision id call it sloppy coding but this is Eidos/Square, Capcom, EA, Activision and Ubisoft all producing Xbox one games at a lower frame rate. I cant chalk that down to coincidence, is it the OS taking up too much space on the system's memory? Is the RAM just not fast enough to keep up with the demands, is the processor being throttled? Where is this extra power MS said they unlocked a few months before launch?

I ask this because i am planning on getting an X1 at some point this summer, I initialy regretted my purchase of the PS4 because i had zero games to play on it but now i dont know how much of a future the X1 has. I hope this levels out during the course of the gen, its fine for games to run at different rates when its exclusive titles but we had been promised parity accross the systems and at the moment that is not happening.

@kagato: Microsoft totally should have tried some sort of cell-processor thing where you could connect your XB1 to your desktop and let it unload half the calculations there.

It's a shame, because I really loved the 360 and wanted to get an XB1, but performance is performance and I rather play games on a better framerate than a worse one.

60 > 30

1080 > 720

This is going to happen a lot the coming year and I really hope Microsoft does not enforce parity for multiplatform games, when in most cases the PS4 can do double the performance. In fact, this will hamper a lot of new multiplatform games if the lowest common denominator, the XB1, has to be met. There is only so little you can do with a 1.21 Teraflop GPU. Thankfully, there is some optimization possible with upclocks and updated API but it won't make a Goku out of a Yamcha.

You should care if you care for multiplatform games.

@xyzygy said:

People are upset they paid $600+ to go from 720p to 1080p, without much performance increases. Yes, "fuck" those people expecting a generation leap.

In the past generation, to make a game that looks good in stills truly became a thing.
..welp here we are :D

Who cares?! You know... apart from all the people who obviously care...

@trafalgarlaw: Yep this is exactly why this worries me. Its going to suck that only the exclusive games will be able to harness the PS4's real power. I think this is the exact scenario that Johnathan Blow hypothesized about on twitter. Visual parity between systems for multiplat but 60fps on PS4.

I was actually being sarcastic about the whole "e-peen graphics" because the be all end all way to kill this argument is to bring up PC. *shrug*

Sounds normal. Not only are the machines different, but they are still new, and Tomb Raider is old software. It wasn't made for X1 and PS4.

Meanwhile, Super Mario 3D World continues to run full 1080 with a smooth 60 fps frame rate. Talk about that, neogaf!

People saying "Who cares" aren't thinking about the future at all.

These consoles just launched roughly 2 months ago, and games have already reached the limits of the xbone, while the PS4 has more to give.

So now, cross-plat game developers are going to have a choice to make in the future.

• A) Make the game for both consoles, knowing it is going to run like shit on the xbone, and be sure to make everyone aware that MS's console simply just can't keep up with what is required.
• B) Drop the xbone all-together and make a game that is going to run great on PC and PS4.

This is what happens when MS decides to build a console that is planned to offload processing to a remote server, and then take away the Always-Online requirement. The machine is stuck with the inferior hardware that is trying to run 3 VMs at all times, and doesn't have access to the remote hardware boost that MS was originally counting on.

Cross-platform developers also aren't going to build for that anyway, not when the other two platforms are not going to support it and can run their game with no problems.

Don't get me wrong. I will get an xbone at some point as well. There are just too many exclusives right now to not get the damn thing. And I think that is what is going to keep the fucking thing in the fight. Right off the bat it has the games people are wanting, and it either has them exclusively or at least as timed exclusives. This forces people to buy the console with the games they want, but only the games they want in the immediate future. The PS4 may not have the starting exclusive line-up that the Xbone does, but it will serve as a more reliable machine farther into the future.

@geraltitude: They rebuilt a lot of things specifically for this version.

Dont bring stupid things like counter arguements, just call them all shills instead thats the right way to do it.

Not nearly enough things to say it's a game designed for PS4 and X1 though. The biggest change is swapping the Lara model and increasing the particle count. The new model comes with some simple physics, like bouncing gear, and there's also the texture swaps so she can show better mud/blood/sweat on her. They've specifically (and foolishly) noted that they changed how Lara's skin is lit - which basically means that instead of revamping the game's lightning system (which would be a big deal) they gave Lara another light map or diffuse map or something.

For the record - I'm going to pick this up on PS4 when it's on sale, and I'm sure it's a great game, but this glorified port not running at "peak performance" on either system really shouldn't be cause for news/alarm to anybody.

@geraltitude: The model is a big change but they also added physics and retooled TressFX.

What I'm saying is that a game which was under development for years with the PS3 and 360 as lead platforms is no good way to judge the XB1 and PS4's capabilities. Did Gun speak to what the 360 could actually do? Nope, and Tomb Raider is no different.

It's cool that I'm getting it on PS4 than, but I don't know, I find this awkward. It could be true, but I'll wait and see. If it turns out to be the case, that's really, really unfortunate for the Xbox One.

@csl316: A solid 30 is OK, but a solid 60 is better. I just think it makes everything feel greater and potentially makes a game more immersive.

LEST WE FORGET http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=167595

It's like people have gone back in time to take the words of the 30fps defenders.

IGN says:

Update: A Square Enix spokesperson issued the following statement to IGN: "Both platforms offer the same outstanding Tomb Raider experience. Delivering the core Tomb Raider gameplay at native 1080p and running at 30fps was always our primary goal given the type of experience Tomb Raider is and the exploration we want players to do. Anything beyond 30fps for this version is gravy."

Which is really my point. It's fine at 30, but the gravy is for the $100 cheaper console.

Funny how that thread only got 11 pages.

From IGN:

"A Square Enix spokesperson issued the following statement to IGN: "Both platforms offer the same outstanding Tomb Raider experience. Delivering the core Tomb Raider gameplay at native 1080p and running at 30fps was always our primary goal given the type of experience Tomb Raider is and the exploration we want players to do. Anything beyond 30fps for this version is gravy."

Wait a minute. Let me run those numbers real quick.

Yes. That seems right to me. Debate over!

It's already been confirmed by the executive producer and the people that have played the game at a pre-release event to be 60. All this means is that they don't want to lower the Xbone sales by saying, "Yeah the PS4 version is better." Instead they say they targeted 30fps for both and the higher fps on PS4 is "gravy."

@rangers517: Yeah, maybe. I don't know. I just wanted to post it anyways since it was a recent update.

Very happy I waste like 90% of my time on PC, said so I still rather get a xbone for couch playing because Titanfall, Sunset Override and Halo 5 run at 0 FPS and 0 Ps on the PS4.

Well i feel it's not a big deal yet for an only xbox one owner because you won't buy a new system just for a lack of a few frames. But it could be if the gap keep growing. It will be on Microsoft and their team to see if they can crack the potential of the xbox one to get more juice out of that machine later down the road. Also the bad ports was something the ps3 never overcame, but in return their first party made up for it by knowing the potential of the box and making some pretty sharp looking games.

Microsoft does not really have that leg to stand on as its the third party box in favor of having a house of first party teams. When the bad ports and better third party versions were on xbox. The tables have turn for now and i don't think anyone should throw their xbox ones away and get ps4s on this news. But i do still think it is news worthy and to anyone who has both systems it could be a factor given the fact its mostly a single player game.

For a guy who consistently rails against fanboys, you sure do go full-on fanboy often, I notice.

Nee I would buy a PS4 in a blink if there were games I care about right now. I do find funny console crowd tearing each other apart because of 2 sup-par cheap ass AMD APUs, it is like arguing solid poop is better than slightly wet poop... yeah dude they both shit either way.

The only reason to have a console nowadays is exclusives.

Didn't the movie Tropic Thunder have something to say about that?

If we are setting a precedent in which the naturally assumed "better" version of these multiplatform titles is Sony, then that is very dangerous for Microsoft. I have no doubt that growing pains will get worked out to some degree, but this isn't very reassuring. I am not saying that as an attack on MS. I haven't purchased a next gen console, but I think even the people who would categorize themselves as "MS Fanboys" would want to hold Microsofts feet to the fire on this issue.

People who think a 30 fps difference is something trivial are either deluded or fucking crazy.

Oh please, both of you have been guilty of this in the past.

I'll freely admit to being highly critical of the Xbox before their reversal of strategies (as was just about everyone) but since then the only thing I've really criticized is a few of their marketing strategies. And I think it's had a rocky start (as is expected at a console launch) but I'm buying one in the next month or so. Big difference between that and going into every thread on the subject and wailing about how "PS4 people" are "just hating Titanfall because Xbox" and saying things like the thing I quoted above.

Well maybe you should stop picking fights with scarecrows.

What you would be saying is wrong. PS4 are X1 are very similar in most respects to one another. If the X1 can't handle a port (albeit an amazing one) that the PS4 has no issue with, of a last gen game, then this doesn't bode well for it.

lol no, sorry liquidprince. Sweet username but anyways:

The PS4 is more powerful than the XB1 and in the long run will have more optimized multiplatform games but this game is very poor proof. Either you don't know or refuse to admit the amount of baggage each game creates for itself - porting is a historically messy business for a reason, otherwise every game that ever came out for 360 would have a great PC port, but lo and behold they don't at all. You think the XB1 and 360 are so similar and yet an entirely different company is porting Titanfall to 360 from PC/XB1. Games just aren't like that. Tomb Raider has massive amounts of last gen baggage. The PC port was proof of that, and PS4, XB1 ports are proof of it too. You have no idea of knowing what was an issue for PS4 and what was an issue for XB1. Could be that the PS4's extra horsepower let's it run Tomb Raider better more easily, but could be if they spent a year optimizing TB it would run parallel on both systems.

TL:DR; multiplat games will look better on PS4 than XB1, Tomb Raider is a shitty example though.

I just want to say that regardless of what platform, Tomb Raider is worth playing. Also, TressFX is both the best and worst thing I found about playing it on PC: When it worked, it looked awesome but made every other character in the game look considerably worse (and made some cut-scenes really distracting). When it didn't work however, it was both hilarious and incredibly disturbing.

This is rough for Microsoft, this will only get worse in the future for the Xbox one.. If it can barely handle these higher res games form last gen at 60fps then it has no chance at running any of the new third party titles at 60 in 1080p either.. shame. Congrats to Sony though for putting out a decent system.

It's stronger and cheaper. Yes this difference is a big deal and will continue to be a big deal.

This statement is patently incorrect. None of this early stuff means anything at all. The developers on both the Xbox One and the PS4 haven't even begun to scratch the surface of what the respective consoles can do. You have an immature API on both consoles and developers without any experience building a game from the ground up on either platform. Things are going to get much much better on both the One and the PS4. As devs learn the subtleties of each platform they will begin wringing out a lot more performance. Most of the games that are still on PS3 and 360 that now appear on both the One and PS4 have been quick and dirty ports with no real budget to improve things. They are just getting the free benefits of having more raw power, but aren't doing anything as far as optimization goes. These are quick wins for the publishers with little effort/risk.

Didn't this game specifically just barely recuperate dev costs in December?

360 to PC to PS3 all had very different architectures. PC's ran x86 vs Cell vs PowerPC. That's what made porting difficult. Right now, the PS4 and X1 are all x86 systems. The minor variations are born from the difference in GPU power and structure of RAM. Microsoft was assuring people that the weaker GPU and DDR3 RAM would not hinder X1 development as compared to the PS4. So far most multiplatform games are showing differently. I own both systems so it would be awesome if the X1 performed as well as PS4. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

Alright, first of all, this is ONE GAME. No one will argue that the Xbox One is equal in processing power to the PS4. However, there is more going on here than simply "OMG PS4 is twice as powerful lulz."

For one, Tomb Raider may be taking advantage of the PS4's strengths, while exposing the Xbox One's weaknesses. Remember the early days of Unreal Engine on the PS3? It was a clusterfuck, and it had nothing to do with overall power. It was all about optimization and fitting to the platform.

For another, it's VERY EARLY IN THE GENERATION. And we already know that the Xbox One has some tricks up it's sleeves that will take a while for developers to take advantage of. Tricks that could actually potentially increase the Xbox One's capabilities in certain respects beyond that of the PS4's.

There were third party games on the PS3 well into the system's lifetime that looked like COMPLETE ASS. Now, arguably some of the best looking games of the generation are on the platform.

It's awesome that the PS4 version is so cool. But don't assume that the Xbox One version is so far behind because the Xbox One is a failure, or an incapable system. The PS4 has the hype, so devs are going to be "servicing" Sony's fanboys/ private bits for a while. Once the Xbox One is figured out and the systems evolve to the point where they are both totally worth developing for (and there is ABSOLUTELY no sign that the Xbox One will be anything but a viable platform, nearly in pace with the PS4) and the development tools and pipelines for both have matured, then we can see how the two systems really match up. I honestly have no idea how they will match up, but considering the best looking game I've seen running on either platform is still Ryse, I am pretty confident that the Xbone will do just fine, if that's the launch level of technical prowess. If that remedy game also looks as good as it looked when announced, that's just another reason to dismiss claims that one super early generational third party port job is in any way indicative of the relative power or relative ANYTHING of the platforms.

Oh, and this is just mysterious sources? On an unfinished game? That may not have seen much in the way of Xbox One optimization? Anyone taking any of this silly shit seriously needs to learn more about how this industry works.