PlayStation 5

My 11 year old nephew wants to save up for a PS5. He’s neve really shown any interest at all in saving for anything. This is the first time. My sister can’t really tell me why he wants one, like if there is a specific reason since that household has more all the other ones, but… his two aunts have been discussing how much money we give him this year for this effort, and what kind of present we should get to go along with it. The three of us do not think he is old enough to be content with envelopes full of cash this year and no presents. This auntie though, has a ton of things he could do around the house to earn cash if he wants to do that. He could have it maybe even by the summer if he tried. It’d be really something though for that kid to earn a next gen console pretty much the first year it came out. It would also make future gift giving events so, so much easier than they are now.

Never too early to be learning about delayed gratification.

I’ll definitely support the idea for Christmas, see how he does with a smaller gift plus cash to see how we handle his birthday.

I’m just really surprised the ask is a PS5 and not say… a phone. He does not have a cellphone, but he is a gamer. After Minecraft turned into a game for babies, it was ARK, Fortnite and umm Dragon City I think because he does have a tablet.

Anyway, sorry about the derail. I am just charmed my nephew wants a next gen console and plans to earn it himself.

I’ll post this in here because I don’t want to be accused of shitting up the Xbox thread. Is this article simply much ado about nothing or has the PS5 somehow managed to be technically superior to the Xbox series X even having a spec disadvantage?

The explanation in the article is likely the right one.

These performance gaps, weird bugs, and differences between the Xbox Series X and PS5 versions of games look like issues related to the games rather than a platform problem for the Xbox. If Microsoft delivered dev kits and tools far later than Sony, then it could take creators more time to optimize further for Xbox. It may also explain why we didn’t see a lot of Xbox Series X gameplay in the months ahead of launch, but Sony was happy to regularly deliver PS5 gameplay.

Well Assassin’s Creed Valhallah just got updated today and it apparently fixed most of the performance issues on Xbox while now performance on the PS5 isn’t so good:

I think folks need to remember that we’re in a pandemic and studios with thousands of people are trying to craft and then fix incredibly complicated pieces of software to run across 7 different platforms, including three of them which are brand new with relatively immature development tools.

Things are going to be inconsistent and rough for at least the next 3-6 months.

I considered making a console wars thread because there’s already been shitposting in both threads tbh. It should be confined somewhere else so the system threads can be specific to the console. Hell, go back and read this one from post one and you will see some definite FUD that people tried to generate.

I should not be the one to create said thread, but it should exist. I read Xbox threads now but I will not post in them again.

MS was later in delivering their dev tools. This was discussed for a while.

I don’t buy the “tools were late” excuse. Feels like a cynical attempt to kick the can down the road. Devs have been telling journalists all year the teraflop advantage was meaningless in practice. Most likely the PS5 has other architectural features that largely negate the deficit in compute resulting in mostly even performance results. I doubt that will change over time.

Haha, I sat there through all those trophy notifications for my Spider-Man import too and it didn’t occur to me it was taking videos of those too. Guess I’ve got some media to purge.

Differences in performance are meaningless at this point, insofar as they aren’t going to point to one console being better than another. The devs making the most performant titles on either console are going to be the first-party folks, and they aren’t going to make multiple versions for us to test against each other.

My prediction is that everyone’s exclusives will play great, and all the third-party games will favor one or the other, with no consistency. Fans of both consoles will use this inconsistency to push whatever narrative they want to.

My prediction is the players who bought Xbox and the players who bought Playstation are going to really enjoy games on their respective systems.

First candidate for the console warz thread. It already did change with AC: Valhalla.

By the patch introducing bugs on PS5? The PS5 performance pre-patch was still better than the XSX is reportedly post patch. Hardly a change of fortunes. Especially when the expectation was a universal 15 or 20% advantage in resolution and/or framerate. Anyone who spent $500 on a XSX has a right to be disappointed after being promised the “most powerful console ever” and the “best way to play”.

Anyway, my point was more about the “late tools” narrative being unreliable, largely coming from people like Tom Warren at the Verge who spent most of the year bragging about the Xbox having more teraflops and dismissing the PS5 as late, hot, underpowered and overclocked at the last minute. Carrying water for the Series X’s shortcomings is as much about saving face for them as anything else.

DF published their Watchdogs: Legion comparison today:

The results? No difference in performance or resolution. Only visual differences likely bugs.

After watching this comparison between PS5 and PS4 versions of Sack Boy Adventure, I have to say, I’m now sure about something that I always suspected would be true: Super Mario Galaxy and other Mario games wouldn’t really benefit all that much from beefier hardware. The extra visual touches might be nice, but it doesn’t change the experience much at all.

Charming looking game by the way. I’ll probably get it on PS4 once the price comes down a bit.

Of course not, graphics have very little to do with gameplay. The last time I saw new gameplay coming from a console generation was the first Assassin’s Creed, which was the first time you really saw crowds of interactive moving NPCs. That was a very, very long time ago.

And then you have times where the urge to craft a game around technology leads to poor gameplay, like Doom 3 where every goddamn room was black as night because they loved the way gun flashes lit up the environment with their new lighting tech.

Graphical fidelity may not impact gameplay but it certainly does aid immersion, and framerates matter too. A Super Mario Galaxy running at high resolution, 120fps, with global illumination would look and play vastly superior.

I have to admit, I’m very curious to finally experience what the heck 120fps feels like, and if I can tell the difference. Especially for racing games, where the difference between 30 and 60 is quite pronounced. I doubt if it would make a difference in a 3D platformer though, but I guess I’ll know if I ever get to see it.

Unfortunately my monitor can only do 1080p 60fps, so I probably won’t know for years.

You can definitely tell a difference going above 60fps, although there’s some point where diminishing returns kick in. 90fps feels super different from 60, but I don’t know that 120 feels much different from 90.

Yes I agree with that.