# Eurogamer: PS4 developers can only access a guaranteed 4.5GB of RAM, rest reserved for the OS.



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 26, 2013)

*Update* Ron mentioned that Sony have released official word on the matter. As they describe it the issue was a misinterpretation of the actual setup which appears to be a mix of traditional memory and a kind of virtual memory which is also available for access by the game. Further quotes on Eurogamer and the post itself.








The most lauded part of the PS4 specs is the 8GB of GDDR5 RAM. While most people were expecting game developers to have access to 7GB of that RAM, it seems that the amount of memory reserved to devs is _less_ than the Xbox One which offers 5GB to devs versus 4.5 on the PS4.



> PlayStation 4 reserves *3.5GB of its 8GB GDDR5 memory for the operating system, leaving 4.5GB of space for game code*, according to current PlayStation 4 documentation shown to Digital Foundry by a well-placed development source.
> 
> However, other sources close to Sony indicate that developers can request *up to an additional gigabyte of "flexible memory"*, and use it to boost elements of the game - *but only if the background OS can spare it.* We're told that incorporating this isn't trivial, and it may well be that to begin with only first-party developers target its usage.
> 
> In addition, two Jaguar CPU cores are allocated to the operating system just like the Xbox One.


http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-system-software-memory


----------



## marksteele (Jul 26, 2013)

rather ridiculous really. If they actually focused their consoles on GAMES, this wouldn't happen.


----------



## FireEmblemGuy (Jul 26, 2013)

I can understand 1GB, maybe even two, but 3.5 seems rather excessive.


----------



## Sterling (Jul 26, 2013)

Up to 5GB of RAM (with caveats) is still quite a bit compared to current generation consoles. I think OSes shouldn't be so big on game consoles though. Kind of stupid if you ask me.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 26, 2013)

To be expected, really. It is silly that an OS needs so much RAM but its nothing new...


----------



## Gahars (Jul 26, 2013)

Well, the PS4 is supposed to be able to record and upload a whole lot of gameplay footage on the fly, so I'm guessing that's where the demand for RAM comes from.

As far as RAM usage goes, 4.5-5.5 gb should be more than plenty for game developers. I mean, we've been dealing with 256-512 mb as a console standard for quite some time now, so no matter what, it's still a huge leap forward. There's no real need to complain about this RAM job.


----------



## ilman (Jul 26, 2013)

Why would a console OS need so much RAM?
The PS3 OS did a fine job and it fit with a game in 256MB of RAM. (correct me if I'm wrong)


----------



## GameWinner (Jul 26, 2013)

ilman said:


> Why would a console OS need so much RAM?
> The PS3 OS did a fine job and it fit with a game in 256MB of RAM. (correct me if I'm wrong)


 
Probably to avoid the same problem with the PS3. IIRC the PS3 couldn't get features like cross game chat due to the ram (something they fixed with the Vita).


----------



## K3N1 (Jul 26, 2013)

Isn't this the same with PC games?


----------



## trumpet-205 (Jul 26, 2013)

Key highlights in PS4 are gameplay streaming and background downloading, so additional RAM are probably for these tasks.


----------



## marksteele (Jul 26, 2013)

kenenthk said:


> Isn't this the same with PC games?


 

Not really. For one thing, windows 7 requires only 2GB (minimum ofc), and for another, you can actually upgrade your ram on a PC, can't on a console.


----------



## K3N1 (Jul 26, 2013)

marksteele said:


> Not really. For one thing, windows 7 requires only 2GB (minimum ofc), and for another, you can actually upgrade ur ram on a PC, can't on a console.


 
All you need is a 8gbs of ram for gaming pcs, how many games out there take 3gbs of ram to run?


----------



## emigre (Jul 26, 2013)

ilman said:


> Why would a console OS need so much RAM?
> The PS3 OS did a fine job and it fit with a game in 256MB of RAM. (correct me if I'm wrong)


 

With XMB, you also have to wait for icons to load which to be honest is pretty fucking irritating.


----------



## lokomelo (Jul 26, 2013)

I thought that PS4 had 16gb... Anyway, X360 has 512mb GDDR3 I think and can do mult task so I doubt that PS4 would need 3.5gb GDDR5 for the system. Even that the news do not look like just a gossip, I think I dont believe it.


----------



## Mantis41 (Jul 26, 2013)

Not sure why I feel let down by this. When I heard the console had 8GB I thought, wow 7GB for games which seemed to open up all sorts of possibilities for the future. Perhaps 4.5 is enough but is does lower my expectations somewhat.


----------



## FireEmblemGuy (Jul 26, 2013)

marksteele said:


> Not really. For one thing, windows 7 requires only 2GB (minimum ofc), and for another, you can actually upgrade your ram on a PC, can't on a console.


 
Technically, Windows 7 and 8 only require 1GB of RAM - although they state 2GB minimum for the 64-bit version, I have Windows 8 64-bit running at around 900MB of RAM at startup with Rainmeter, Core Temp and AutoHotKey running in the background. You need 1.5-2GB to actually do much of anything, sure, but you can run them on a gig or so.

And that's what confuses me most about this news. The PS4 likely isn't aiming to run as complex an operating system as Windows; it'll likely be a more RAM-friendly, cut down Linux-based OS. The basics of it, even with the eye candy for menus and backgrounds, should not total out to even one gig of RAM. The premium features, such as background downloads and cross-chat and video recording, shouldn't take up a whole lot more than another GB, unless they're letting us record for a near-limitless amount of time, or record our voice chats as well, or something equally ridiculous. Reserving anything more than 2GB just seems wasteful to me.


----------



## Snailface (Jul 26, 2013)

Haha Sony fanboys, the honeymoon is OVER!
No RamBytes = no Graphicks: PS4 Doomed!


_What is with these new consoles reserving 1/2 their RAM for the OS? _
_Just to swap in and out between game and OS is not a good enough reason imo._


----------



## marksteele (Jul 26, 2013)

FireEmblemGuy said:


> Technically, Windows 7 and 8 only require 1GB of RAM - although they state 2GB minimum for the 64-bit version, I have Windows 8 64-bit running at around 900MB of RAM at startup with Rainmeter, Core Temp and AutoHotKey running in the background. You need 1.5-2GB to actually do much of anything, sure, but you can run them on a gig or so.
> 
> And that's what confuses me most about this news. The PS4 likely isn't aiming to run as complex an operating system as Windows; it'll likely be a more RAM-friendly, cut down Linux-based OS. The basics of it, even with the eye candy for menus and backgrounds, should not total out to even one gig of RAM. The premium features, such as background downloads and cross-chat and video recording, shouldn't take up a whole lot more than another GB, unless they're letting us record for a near-limitless amount of time, or record our voice chats as well, or something equally ridiculous. Reserving anything more than 2GB just seems wasteful to me.


 

mmm my assumption was that consoles run 64 bit architecture.


----------



## Osha (Jul 26, 2013)

Wow, big deal... It's not like games require that much ram to begin with, seriously.


----------



## Snailface (Jul 26, 2013)

Osha said:


> Wow, big deal... It's not like games require that much ram to begin with, seriously.


Streaming open worlds would like to have a word with you.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 26, 2013)

The more consoles try to do outside of gaming, the more they lose their advantage of getting the most out of their hardware for games versus PC.


----------



## Qtis (Jul 26, 2013)

I'm a bit surprised, but then again, quite a few games on the PC side can run on a lot less RAM than 4.5 GB. The OS and other stuff such as anti-virus software take up RAM quite fast when running alongside the games. The video recording does seem to take a lot, but we'll see how this ends up in the future. It's not like they couldn't release more RAM after the OS optimizes a bit more.


----------



## WiiUBricker (Jul 26, 2013)

Welp, Wii U is doomed because of no games, Xbone is doomed because MS fucked up and the PS4 is doomed because it can use only 4.5 GB RAM.  Guess that's it for the games industry.


----------



## Mantis41 (Jul 26, 2013)

Back to my PC upgrade plans.


----------



## p1ngpong (Jul 26, 2013)

This is literally the worst news I have heard in  the last five minutes. Fuck your shit $ony!

*runs off crying*


----------



## calmwaters (Jul 26, 2013)

What happened to these people? You're supposed to get smarter as you get older, not make the mistakes you made when you were 30. Or maybe they are just children trapped in an adult's body.


----------



## emigre (Jul 26, 2013)

WiiUBricker said:


> Welp, Wii U is doomed because of no games, Xbone is doomed because MS fucked up and the PS4 is doomed because it can use only 4.5 GB RAM. Guess that's it for the games industry.


 

Don't worry we still have the Ouya.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jul 26, 2013)

Gahars said:


> Well, the PS4 is supposed to be able to record and upload a whole lot of gameplay footage on the fly, so I'm guessing that's where the demand for RAM comes from.
> 
> As far as RAM usage goes, 4.5-5.5 gb should be more than plenty for game developers. I mean, we've been dealing with 256-512 mb as a console standard for quite some time now, so no matter what, it's still a huge leap forward. There's no real need to complain about this RAM job.


Yeah, no. Just exactly how important is that video capturing, exactly? I would think developers could turn that shit off in case they want to prevent spoilers all over youtube before the game is even released in all parts of the world. And even then...as you say so yourself: with 512mb being the standard for *the entire console*, how the hell does a background OS suddenly needs *seven times that amount*?

The "more than plenty" argument...I'm not sure about it. Sometimes, it looks as if every console generation allows developers to be more lazy when it comes to memory optimisation.


----------



## Zerousen (Jul 26, 2013)

I honestly don't see too many issues. Sure, the console OS is huge, but 4.5 GBs of RAM seems plenty. Doesn't matter too much for me anyways, gonna be building my own PC soon.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Jul 26, 2013)

Man their OS is such a bloated piece of shit. My Windows 7 install uses less than that when I'm not running Firefox, and that's with well over a hundred processes running in the background as well as 1GB of stuff being cached in memory.
That said, games shouldn't really need more than that. But the fact that the OS uses so much memory you could run a full HD 3D game on the same amount of memory tells me the people who are coding the OS have no idea what they're doing.


----------



## Joe88 (Jul 26, 2013)

the os most likely uses nowhere near that, it's just future proofing at this point


----------



## Öhr (Jul 26, 2013)

3.5GB... that's way more than your standard computer requires with just a few applications open. I'm right now at merely 3.4GB with foobar2000 (music), thunderbird (email), firefox (browser) and steam being the big ram eating culprits (on win7 64bit). That's total, no swap (which I disabled for that extra performance boost). So you say that's already using the full 3.5GB with no game running! true, but it's not like my computer and OS is optimized for one kind of hardware and just a small portion of useful applications - unlike the ps4.

3.5GB will not hurt right now, but on the long run, the ps4 might come to an early halt... a pity!


----------



## Rydian (Jul 26, 2013)

Anybody who thinks that's not enough RAM, do us all a favor.

1 - Run a game on your PC (a _game_ that, of course, would actually see the console, 3DS Max is not a game, Sony Vegas is not a game, etc.) that you think takes up a lot of RAM.
2 - Minimize it (or _preferably_ run it windowed) and wait until you're in-game.
3 - Press CTRL+SHIFT+ESCAPE.
4 - In the new window, go to the "processes" tab.
5 - Find the game's process, look to the "Memory" tab and take that number.
6 - Divide that number by 1,000,000 (a million).
7 - That's how much RAM it's using, in GB, at the time you're looking at that list.

inb4 "LOLrydian people know how to do this" - No they don't.  Can't tell you how many times people tell me they _need_ 16GB of RAM when they're running games using a gig or less, or something happens and everybody and their grandmother says "MEMORY LEAK!" when the thing's using the same amount of RAM it normally does, etc.

EDIT: Added the unit of measurement, whoops.


----------



## Zombie_X (Jul 26, 2013)

Meh so what. the 4.5GB is probably much better than the 8GB that the XBONE has anyways. It's still odd that the thing needs 3.5GB  of RAM for the OS. If their capture chip for video recording is something like a HD PVR, then not much RAM is needed at all.


----------



## DinohScene (Jul 27, 2013)

Half of the console RAM to recording and itself?
Seems a little steep imho....


----------



## mechagouki (Jul 27, 2013)

Zombie_X said:


> Meh so what. the 4.5GB is probably much better than the 8GB that the XBONE has anyways.


 
This statement should be next to "Sony Fanboy" in the dictionary.

Profound words there Zombie_X.


----------



## person66 (Jul 27, 2013)

I feel like most of you have no idea how much 4.5GB of RAM actually is. It is PLENTY for a console. Games up to this point (on consoles) have gotten away with less than half a GB, and now this is more than 8 times that amount. Anyone who thinks we need more doesn't really know what they are talking about.


----------



## Flame (Jul 27, 2013)

That's still like 18 times more than current gen.... I don't see the problem.




p1ngpong said:


> This is literally the worst news I have heard in the last five minutes. Fuck your shit $ony!
> 
> *runs off crying*


 
I Beg you don't cry P1ng.. we still have PC master race and steam.... STEAM...


----------



## macmanhigh (Jul 27, 2013)

This is whut happens when u don't focus on games and put ur effort into nonsense like social bullshit, streaming and recording bullshit and ever other piece of bullshit that doesn't involve actually playing......


----------



## Zombie_X (Jul 27, 2013)

mechagouki said:


> This statement should be next to "Sony Fanboy" in the dictionary.
> 
> Profound words there Zombie_X.


 

I'm no Sony fan boy, I'm not really any consoles fan boy, but IMO the GDDR memory in the PS4 will vastly outperform what the XBONE has. I'll probably get an XBONE down the road, but not for a long while.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Jul 27, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Anybody who thinks that's not enough RAM, do us all a favor.
> 
> 1 - Run a game on your PC (a _game_ that, of course, would actually see the console, 3DS Max is not a game, Sony Vegas is not a game, etc.) that you think takes up a lot of RAM.
> 2 - Minimize it (or _preferably_ run it windowed) and wait until you're in-game.
> ...


 

I wonder does that RAM number include the Gig or 2 of Video RAM that many graphics cards these days are packing?


----------



## back25 (Jul 27, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Anybody who thinks that's not enough RAM, do us all a favor.
> 
> 1 - Run a game on your PC (a _game_ that, of course, would actually see the console, 3DS Max is not a game, Sony Vegas is not a game, etc.) that you think takes up a lot of RAM.
> 2 - Minimize it (or _preferably_ run it windowed) and wait until you're in-game.
> ...


 

*does this*

*sees the heavy game AND windows 7 doesn't need 3.5GB RAM"

WHY THE FUCK PS4 OS NEEDS IT?


----------



## wrettcaughn (Jul 27, 2013)

Lol...  I wonder what the headline would have looked like had it been MS who only allowed devs access to half their console's RAM...


----------



## Bi0Hazrd (Jul 27, 2013)

I think they reserve that quantity of memory for future proof features of the os. I think it's ok that way.


----------



## xist (Jul 27, 2013)

wrettcaughn said:


> Lol... I wonder what the headline would have looked like had it been MS who only allowed devs access to half their console's RAM...


 
I know it's not directly related to your post but it's relatively apt. Taken from the Neogaf thread relating to this same topic -


> _Originally Posted by *GodofWine*_
> 
> GPU is weaker in xb​RAM is slower in xb​And less RAM, slower RAM, is potentially available for games in xb.​​It doesn't change the landscape here.​


----------



## The Pi (Jul 27, 2013)

Psionic Roshambo said:


> I wonder does that RAM number include the Gig or 2 of Video RAM that many graphics cards these days are packing?


 
Nope.

While Rydian is right with the 4.5GB being enough for the game. It's still too strange that an OS would take 3.5GB or 2.5GB "If it can spare"

I'm probably wrong with this but it never said the leftover ram would be used entirely for the OS. So it could simply be they are reserving part of the ram just now so they know how to properly allocate it later.

i.e. If it released as 7GB for games then a new OS feature they wanted to add raised the OS usage to 1.5GB then they couldn't add it and it's not like games are hindered by 4.5GB for now (at least at 1080p)


----------



## The Milkman (Jul 27, 2013)

Because RAM is the most important aspect of ANY form of gaming.

Come on guys, this is x86 were talking here. You have to expect an actual OS to be running here.

Not saying it NEEDS it, but I am saying its future-proofing like Joe88 said. Seeing how 4 GB tends to be more then enough on even the heaviest games, you might ask why Sony even put 8 GB in the first place.


----------



## yuyuyup (Jul 27, 2013)

Sony probably maybe knows what they're doing, but frankly now I have little confidence in all three next-gen offerings. I think it's a good thing the PS4 is taken down a peg resulting in a leveling of the playing field a bit. Also admittedly it makes my Wii U purchase seem less regrettable.


----------



## Arm73 (Jul 27, 2013)

person66 said:


> I feel like most of you have no idea how much 4.5GB of RAM actually is. It is PLENTY for a console. Games up to this point (on consoles) have gotten away with less than half a GB, and now this is more than 8 times that amount. Anyone who thinks we need more doesn't really know what they are talking about.


You miss the point here.
I think the outrage comes from the fact that they shocked us with frigging 8GB of memory at the unveiling and everybody just got blown away by the news and even MS had to do some last minute adjustment to stand up to the competition.
Everybody has been praising the PS4 on their knees ever since because of the might 8GB of DDR5 .

As it turns out, only ( and like you say that is plenty anyway ) 4.5 GB are available.
Nothing deal breaking of course, but all the hype and all the fanboys making 8GB a BIG deal now can finally shot up.
It was all a publicity stunt to begin with.
And everybody bit into it.


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Jul 27, 2013)

4.5 GB is still a lot to use in PS4 games. Hell, some developers were even impressed with the 1GB of RAM available for Wii U games. What's happening here is that RAM is getting so cheap that computers and consoles can include way more than they need to. Now, if the PS4 is going to have 3.5GB for the OS it will most certainly be fast and capable of doing a lot of things.


----------



## trumpet-205 (Jul 27, 2013)

*People need to understand that PS4 is using unified RAM. Meaning that 8 GB is used by both CPU and GPU.*


----------



## Coto (Jul 27, 2013)

FireEmblemGuy said:


> Technically, Windows 7 and 8 only require 1GB of RAM - although they state 2GB minimum for the 64-bit version, I have Windows 8 64-bit running at around 900MB of RAM at startup with Rainmeter, Core Temp and AutoHotKey running in the background. You need 1.5-2GB to actually do much of anything, sure, but you can run them on a gig or so.
> 
> And that's what confuses me most about this news. The PS4 likely isn't aiming to run as complex an operating system as Windows; it'll likely be a more RAM-friendly, cut down Linux-based OS. The basics of it, even with the eye candy for menus and backgrounds, should not total out to even one gig of RAM. The premium features, such as background downloads and cross-chat and video recording, shouldn't take up a whole lot more than another GB, unless they're letting us record for a near-limitless amount of time, or record our voice chats as well, or something equally ridiculous. Reserving anything more than 2GB just seems wasteful to me.


 

raw data processed, as-is = bigger amounts of data required in storage media (ram too), less CPU demanding

compressed and encoded data = fewer requirements of storage media space, but more CPU demanding.

a chip that copies video buffer -> into video frames, compressed in realtime, will take the best from both worlds, voice chat included if in another thread.

Caching is what will be RAM consuming, as the target media where the chip writes the converted data, will be quite busy, and newly generated data will need to be stored somewhere. 

you get the idea


----------



## FireGrey (Jul 27, 2013)

Am I the only one that is happy about this news?
I was worried that only 1GB was allocated to the system, cause 7GB won't be used for games until about a decade.
3.5GB to the system means that we can browse through the menu quite easily, browsing through the PS3 menu was so slow, especially the playstation store.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jul 27, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Anybody who thinks that's not enough RAM, do us all a favor.
> 
> 1 - Run a game on your PC (a _game_ that, of course, would actually see the console, 3DS Max is not a game, Sony Vegas is not a game, etc.) that you think takes up a lot of RAM.
> 2 - Minimize it (or _preferably_ run it windowed) and wait until you're in-game.
> ...


Tell me about it. I had it happen at my job where some hotshot managed to order 4 extra GB of RAM on top of the 4GB his brand new laptop already carried (he "needed it"). I got informed by mail that I just had to install the extra RAM and deliver it to him.

The scary thing wasn't that he asked his boss and he believed him, or even that that boss ordered it for him (while our company was being restructured and - supposedly - had to keep the wallet tight)...or even that my boss put the order through (he's usually too busy to check on what people actually order, let alone need). No: the scary part was that he wasn't even punished for blatantly lying about what he needed.

There was no extra slot for extra RAM in the laptop. And nor should there be...because we were still running windows XP 32 bit.



And this is what scares me: that the decision to use 8GB of RAM isn't made because it needs to...but because hot shots and marketeers want to use it as a sales argument.


On the other hand, I've got to admit that trumpet-205 has a more than decent point here:



trumpet-205 said:


> *People need to understand that PS4 is using unified RAM. Meaning that 8 GB is used by both CPU and GPU.*


 
This is probably where most of that RAM is being used for: the GPU side. Kind of strange why they're using unified RAM if the first thing they're doing is splitting it up again, but hey...sales argument (OMG it has more RAM!!!!).


----------



## trumpet-205 (Jul 27, 2013)

Taleweaver said:


> This is probably where most of that RAM is being used for: the GPU side. Kind of strange why they're using unified RAM if the first thing they're doing is splitting it up again, but hey...sales argument (OMG it has more RAM!!!!).


Unified RAM simplifies programming a lot. In the old days, CPU has to fetch the data to RAM first, then move the data to VRAM on GPU, finally GPU can render a frame.

With unified RAM, data does not need to travel, since GPU and CPU share the same memory space.


----------



## KazoWAR (Jul 27, 2013)

don't forget about what ever amount of RAM is used on GPUs, that also lumped into the PS4 4.5 GB game limit!


----------



## Mantis41 (Jul 27, 2013)

Sony and MS may be wanting to prevent programmers producing bloatware with additional RAM being freed up later in the development cycle.


> While the confirmation that Sony’s next generation system will include 8GB GDDR5 RAM was met by rapturous applause during February’s big PlayStation 4 jolly-up, a laundry list of developers have hinted that the gigantic offering could lead to ‘lazy’ programming in a report published by VideoGamer.com.


source


----------



## shakirmoledina (Jul 27, 2013)

the fact that it has 8gb gddr5 is in itself excessive.

then again seems quite a lot... power hungry machine.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 27, 2013)

Wasn't it announced that the XBone also only gives 5GB of Ram to the game? So what's the fuss about? Who cares? Games are the same boring mess we got the last few years, ram doesn't change that. I never thought I would say this but to me gaming gets worse every single year. I am so glad indies exist where games care about being a game and not about teh grafix...


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 27, 2013)

EzekielRage said:


> Wasn't it announced that the XBone also only gives 5GB of Ram to the game? So what's the fuss about? Who cares? Games are the same boring mess we got the last few years, ram doesn't change that. I never thought I would say this but to me gaming gets worse every single year. I am so glad indies exist where games care about being a game and not about teh grafix...


 
This. As a 20+ years gaming veteran, this is my conclusion too. Next-gen will be absolutely the same as last-gen, just with true high definition graphics(instead of rendering 480p and upscaling it). More polygons and better textures. That's all folks...

I am getting really bored with so-called "hardcore gaming". My happiest gaming hours the last few years were on the DS and on the 3DS... Nintendo is the only one who still knows how to make fun games...


----------



## marksteele (Jul 27, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> This. As a 20+ years gaming veteran, this is my conclusion too. Next-gen will be absolutely the same as last-gen, just with true high definition graphics(instead of rendering 480p and upscaling it). More polygons and better textures. That's all folks...
> 
> I am getting really bored with so-called "hardcore gaming". My happiest gaming hours the last few years were on the DS and on the 3DS... Nintendo is the only one who still knows how to make fun games...


 

But templar, you totally forgot you can swap to TV in the middle of playing your games


----------



## Sakitoshi (Jul 27, 2013)

Rydian said:


> *Rydian teaching how to view RAM use*


 
My results with Borderlands 2, all settings to max except Physx that is at medium.


Spoiler











a gig of RAM, VRAM is left out though. I don't know if VRAM can be seen.


----------



## xist (Jul 27, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> My happiest gaming hours the last few years were on the DS and on the 3DS... Nintendo is the only one who still knows how to make fun games...


 
Subjectivity reigns supreme...at this exact moment in time I would disagree completely with your second statement. Don't get me wrong, I had a blast with my DS but these days Nintendo is like a shadow of itself.


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 27, 2013)

xist said:


> Subjectivity reigns supreme...at this exact moment in time I would disagree completely with your second statement. Don't get me wrong, I had a blast with my DS but these days Nintendo is like a shadow of itself.


 
And what gaming company is not? Name one...

Bioware?Blizzard?Bethesda?EA?Activision?Ubisoft?SEGA?Capcom?Konami?

All of those produce shit nowadays...


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 27, 2013)

Well actually some companies are MUCH better now than they were a few years ago. HOWEVER that does not mean they make better games. You have to differentiate that.
Nintendo is doing the same thing they always did. It's jus that now we KNOW so much of the behind the scenes stuff that we actually complain about it. Back in the day we just had no clue how business went and what was about to be happening. So nothing changed there. The games are still of high quality and very creative. They release sequels in their pilalr franchises and every few years tehy create something new. NOTHING changed here, really...


----------



## chyyran (Jul 27, 2013)

So, Sony gave a statement about the amount of RAM available.


> We would like to clear up a misunderstanding regarding our "direct" and "flexible" memory systems. The article states that "flexible" memory is borrowed from the OS, and must be returned when requested - that's not actually the case.
> 
> The actual true distinction is that:
> 
> ...


Eurogamer

What I got from this is that there's 4.5GB of OS-unmanaged RAM, while the rest available to games _is_ OS-managed.

Seems unreasonably complex to me.

Nothing on how much RAM the OS actually takes, but Eurogamer reckons it's ~5GB available.


----------



## back25 (Jul 27, 2013)

Ron said:


> poast


 
time to edit the front page


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 27, 2013)

Lol even Windows 8 uses less system memory then the Xbone and PS4


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Sakitoshi said:


> My results with Borderlands 2, all settings to max except Physx that is at medium.
> a gig of RAM, VRAM is left out though. I don't know if VRAM can be seen.


 
You can see your Vram usage with a program called MSI Afterburner, it's not only for MSI products by the way.


----------



## VMM (Jul 28, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> This. As a 20+ years gaming veteran, this is my conclusion too. Next-gen will be absolutely the same as last-gen, just with true high definition graphics(instead of rendering 480p and upscaling it). More polygons and better textures. That's all folks...
> 
> 
> am getting really bored with so-called "hardcore gaming". My happiest gaming hours the last few years were on the DS and on the 3DS... *Nintendo is the only one who still knows how to make fun games*...


 



TemplarGR said:


> And what gaming company is not? Name one...





TemplarGR said:


> Bioware?Blizzard?Bethesda?EA?Activision?Ubisoft?SEGA?Capcom?Konami?
> 
> All of those produce shit nowadays...





While some companies decay, others rise and take their places.
A lot of people praise Nintendo for it's first parties, but Nintendo just keeps doing the same games they always did,
there are no new IPs over a decade and Mario is being used in every stupid way possible,
wether it's playing basketball or playing Olympics with Sonic.

Meanwhile, Sony has been doing an excellent job with first parties, they keep updating their older franchises like Gran Turismo and God of War, while always creating new ones, we had Rachet and Clank, Shadow of Colossus, Killzone, Infamous, Little big Planet, Uncharted, Twisted Metal, so many, yet they keep investing on new IPs, like Last of Us, a masterpiece right at the end of PS3 lifecycle and that no one would expect.

Next gen we can expect even more new high quality IPs from Sony, while Nintendo will find something even more stupid for Mario to do.

We had many good games this generation as we have at every generation.
Skyrim, Batman Saga, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Boderlands, Mass Effect 3, Red Dead Redemption, Portal 2, Far Cry 3 and many others.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

DSGamer64 said:


> Lol even Windows 8 uses less system memory then the Xbone and PS4


 
Funny. Does Windows record your screen while you play a game at 1080p at all times? I figured as much. That, and the PS4/XBone have shared memory wheras a Windows 8 PC does not - you have to add RAM and VRAM usage together to compare the two.

As for the setup, it doesn't seem to be unreasonable at all.

4.5GB RAM is used for game resources, code, textures, sound and whatnot, 1GB is used for shared _"flexible memory"_ - this is where you introduce interactions between the game proper and the PlayStation ecosystem, of which the OS is the entry point. Finally you're left with 2.5GB memory for the screen capture and the OS. Not bad, not bad at all.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

VMM said:


> While some companies decay, others rise and take their places.
> A lot of people praise Nintendo for it's first parties, but Nintendo just keeps doing the same games they always did,
> there are no new IPs over a decade and Mario is being used in every stupid way possible,
> wether it's playing basketball or playing Olympics with Sonic.
> ...


 
Did you just call the recent Batman games "bad"? I don't even have to point out the difference between Nintendo _developing_ the Mario games, and Sony _paying somebody_ to make Last of Us.

If it aint broke, don't fix it, and as long as Mario continues to sell, I say fuck, don't break it by fixing it. haters gonna hate.


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 28, 2013)

VMM said:


> While some companies decay, others rise and take their places.
> A lot of people praise Nintendo for it's first parties, but Nintendo just keeps doing the same games they always did,
> there are no new IPs over a decade and Mario is being used in every stupid way possible,
> wether it's playing basketball or playing Olympics with Sonic.
> ...


 
It seems to me you don't really know anything about gaming...

Nintendo uses the same franchises and characters, but innovates(or at least tries to innovate) in terms of gameplay in every generation. For example Mario 64 is nothing like Mario Galaxy, although they are both on the same series.

The others just update the graphics and put more cutscenes.

Let's describe the games you named:

1) Skyrim. Graphical update of a dumbed down Oblivion, which was a graphical upgrade of a dumbed down Morrowind, which was a graphical update of a dumbed down Daggerfall. See a pattern here? Boring empty souless game. I enjoyed creating different builds of characters just to see what was possible, spent over 200 hours on this game(creating new characters and leveling them up a bit), never finished it once because it was so boring... And believe me, i still consider it the best game of this current generation on non Nintendo platforms...

2) Batman= Overrated graphical update of Final Fight with batman gadgets. It is hyped because it is a decent comic book hero game by fanboys.

3) Bioshock. Overrated First person shooter with crappy controls(like most console FPSs) and plasmoids. Yawn.

4) Assasin's Creed. B-movie with some kind-of-stealth handholding game in between. Boring.

5) Borderlands. Boring FPS with Diablo elements.Yawn again...

6) Mass Effect series. Scifi b-movie with a gear-of-wars clone between the cutscenes.

7) Red Dead Redemption. Wild west reskin of GTA IV.

8) Portal 2. A mediocre FPS puzzle game. Overrated as hell.

9) Far cry 3. Overrated FPS with open world elements. Frankly boring, with unrealistic gunplay and sucky controls...

For Sony exclusives, give me a brake... They suck so-so much it is not even funny. If not for the marketing dollar of Sony, none would know them...

God of War= Final fight clone with recent graphics.

Gran Turismo= I don't think it is overrated anymore, most know it sucks now.

Killzone=Just a tech demo for the PS

Uncharted and Last of us= Quality cutscenes and a boring game in between...

So, what is this "new ip"? There is nothing really. They create the same games, just with different models, textures, and character names. And they call it "new ip". Modern gaming is just reharses and dumbed down sequels with better graphics and more cutscenes for the teens and nerds who wouldn't know a good story if it hit them in the head...

At least Nintendo tries to test new control schemes and gameplay elements. And creates games for the gameplay, not for the cutscenes.

If i want to watch a movie or a tv series, i will do it thank you very much. Moviefication of games has become too much...

PS: Don't get me wrong, most of the games i criticized are decent, and you can enjoy and have fun with them(if you are not so jaded of playing the same game again and again like me). They just aren't the second coming of Christ like the gaming press and the fanbois hype them, and they certainly aren't "new". They are the same games we get a decade now... So-called "new ip"...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> Did you just call the recent Batman games "bad"? I don't even have to point out the difference between Nintendo _developing_ the Mario games, and Sony _paying somebody_ to make Last of Us.
> 
> If it aint broke, don't fix it, and as long as Mario continues to sell, I say fuck, don't break it by fixing it. haters gonna hate.


 
Naughty Dog is a Sony-owned studio, it's their equivalent of Nintendo's Retro Studios. They're not _"paying someone to make their games"_ any more than Nintendo does, get off the high horse.



TemplarGR said:


> _*Rabble Rabble Rabble*_


 
_"Gears of War"_ isn't even a Sony title, it's a Microsoft game. It's not a fighting game either, it's a Third-Person Shooter.

We can go with your way of thinking and say that _"Pokemon"_ are all essentially the same game with more Pokemon each year, ergo they're boring and not worthwhile. The same goes to New Super Mario Bros. which are minor graphical updates of one another. Mario Kart and F-Zero haven't changed much either, neither did Smash Bros. - essentially the same mechanics with different character rosters and a graphics update.

I'm not seeing the whole _"innovation"_ aspect. There are games in which you can have a free hand like Mario which is open enough to introduce elements from various genres. The equivalents from third-party would be Sonic games. There are also games in which you _cannot_ do that like Mario _Kart_ because at the end of the day, it has to remain a _karting_ game because that's the whole point and this is also the case with a lot of games you find issues with. It's not a _"fault"_, it's a part of the design. You can't change the formula of _"Borderlands"_ because it wouldn't be _"Borderlands"_ anymore.


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Naughty Dog is a Sony-owned studio, it's their equivalent of Nintendo's Retro Studios. They're not _"paying someone to make their games"_ any more than Nintendo does, get off the high horse.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I made a mistake, i meant God of War. It should be obvious it is a typo and not a mistake of knowledge...

As for the "innovation" aspect. You are right. Apart for experimenting with control schemes and minor evolutions, Nintendo doesn't innovate. But, my answer was about the so called "innovation" and "new ip" of other companies... To criticize Nintendo of not innovating while giving Activision, Sony, EA and the like a free pass is stupid.

At least Nintendo creates games, not movies...

PS: Oh, and dismissing a person's opinion as "rabble rabble rabble" is not decent behaviour...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> I made a mistake, i meant God of War. It should be obvious it is a typo and not a mistake of knowledge...
> 
> As for the "innovation" aspect. You are right. Apart for experimenting with control schemes and minor evolutions, Nintendo doesn't innovate. But, my answer was about the so called "innovation" and "new ip" of other companies... To criticize Nintendo of not innovating while giving Activision, Sony, EA and the like a free pass is stupid.
> 
> At least Nintendo creates games, not movies...


 
I don't see how cutscenes make a game _"bad"_, they flesh out the story. You may have not liked _"The Last of Us"_ but the rest of the world enjoyed it quite a lot, me included. Your tastes are not universal and at the end of the day, Nintendo does play it safe. There's nothing stopping them from making new and innovative IP's if they're making new and innovative Mario games but they cling to the Mario franchise because they know that with a Mario sticker the game is going to print out money. You said it yourself - certain Mario games are nothing alike, and if that's the case, why are they both in the same basket in the first place? This goes back to _"Doki Doki Panic"_ which was sold outside of Japan as a Mario game and is the source of a great majority of the most well-known characters while not even being a Mario game originally.

Now, this is hardly a problem with Mario since as I said, it's an open series _but_ it's not a free-out-of-jail-card for others. I do believe that _"Uncharted Paint", "Uncharted Kart", "Uncharted Galaxy"_ and _"Uncharted"_ would be an eyesore of a release list wheras with Mario it's relatively mouth-watering - this is because some franchises are flexible like that and some just aren't. It's a matter of whether or not the game world gives you that wide realm of probability - you can imagine there being a kart race in the Mushroom Kingdom but Nathan Drake karting around Inca cities sounds stupid because it's not what Uncharted is - it'd be a funny spin-off, yes, but not an Uncharted game in its full rights so to speak.


----------



## FireGrey (Jul 28, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> This. As a 20+ years gaming veteran, this is my conclusion too. Next-gen will be absolutely the same as last-gen, just with true high definition graphics(instead of rendering 480p and upscaling it). More polygons and better textures. That's all folks...
> 
> I am getting really bored with so-called "hardcore gaming". My happiest gaming hours the last few years were on the DS and on the 3DS... Nintendo is the only one who still knows how to make fun games...


 
It's not exactly the same though, there's more of a social gaming focus.


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> I don't see how cutscenes make a game _"bad"_, they flesh out the story. You may have not liked _"The Last of Us"_ but the rest of the world enjoyed it quite a lot, me included. Your tastes are not universal and at the end of the day, Nintendo does play it safe. There's nothing stopping them from making new and innovative IP's if they're making new and innovative Mario games but they cling to the Mario franchise because they know that with a Mario sticker the game is going to print out money. You said it yourself - certain Mario games are nothing alike, and if that's the case, why are they both in the same basket in the first place? This goes back to _"Doki Doki Panic"_ which was sold outside of Japan as a Mario game and is the source of a great majority of the most well-known characters while not even being a Mario game originally.
> 
> Now, this is hardly a problem with Mario since as I said, it's an open series _but_ it's not a free-out-of-jail-card for others. I do believe that _"Uncharted Paint", "Uncharted Kart", "Uncharted Galaxy"_ and _"Uncharted"_ would be an eyesore of a release list wheras with Mario it's relatively mouth-watering - this is because some franchises are flexible like that and some just aren't. It's a matter of whether or not the game world gives you that wide realm of probability - you can imagine there being a kart race in the Mushroom Kingdom but Nathan Drake karting around Inca cities sounds stupid because it's not what Uncharted is - it'd be a funny spin-off, yes, but not an Uncharted game in its full rights so to speak.


 
It is not about my tastes. It is about if something is even considered a game or not. Most AAA PS-Xbox games are NOT games anymore. You watch cutscene after cutscene, and play a stupid handholding mini-game in between. Take for example the Last of Us. Seriously, what did you enjoy? I know i know, the "story", the "atmosphere", the "graphics", the "actors". A b movie story, that if it was on the cinema, you would never go to watch it... Yet you paid to "play" it a (comparatively) vast sum of money...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

TemplarGR said:


> It is not about my tastes. It is about if something is even considered a game or not. Most AAA PS-Xbox games are NOT games anymore. You watch cutscene after cutscene, and play a stupid handholding mini-game in between. Take for example the Last of Us. Seriously, what did you enjoy? I know i know, the "story". A b movie story, that if it was on the cinema, you would never go to watch it... Yet you paid to "play" it a (comparatively) vast sum of money...


 
...what the hell are you talking about? I enjoyed things beyond the story. _"The Last of Us"_ gave me a free hand in approaching problems - I could sneak if I wanted to, I could use brute force if I wanted to. I could choose how I play it.

The game world is spectacular, the level design is top-notch, the visuals are stunning, the gameplay's great, each and every weapon is extensively upgradable to cater to my play style and the occasional QTE only makes it more engrossing because you _can _make good QTE's if you know how.

That, and there's still the Multiplayer clan war section to tackle after you've finished the campaign. The title has a lot to offer and your _"not liking it"_ remains subjective. Your point about the atmosphere, the actors and the story is moot when I literally _paid for the atmosphere, the actors and the story,_ or to be more accurate, my girlfriend has since we share games, and we did not regret the purchase. In fact, this is one of those games that I can't wait to buy DLC for.



TemplarGR said:


> PS: Oh, and dismissing a person's opinion as "rabble rabble rabble" is not decent behaviour...


That's hardly dismissal - I read what you wrote, I just found it to be rabble because for the most part it's baseless. You're poking holes where there aren't any and some of the flaws you mention are _qualities people buy given games for_, as seen above. I would've dismissed it if I completely skipped it.  As I said earlier, your opionion is entirely subjective, others may disagree and in fact do disagree.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Naughty Dog is a Sony-owned studio, it's their equivalent of Nintendo's Retro Studios. They're not _"paying someone to make their games"_ any more than Nintendo does, get off the high horse.


If you'd stop beating the crap out of the dead horse, you'd have realized I was referring to Nintendo being the developer of Mario, compared to Naughty Dog being the developer for Last of Us.

The fact is Nintendo has been making Mario games for years, while Naughty Dog showed up one day and happened to make games under the Sony systems. When somebody says Nintendo, it's common to think of Mario. But when somebody says Sony, I am definitely not going to fuckin think about Naughty Dog.


----------



## TemplarGR (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> ...what the hell are you talking about? I enjoyed things beyond the story. _"The Last of Us"_ gave me a free hand in approaching problems - I could sneak if I wanted to, I could use brute force if I wanted to. I could choose how I play it.
> 
> The game world is spectacular, the level design is top-notch, the visuals are stunning, the gameplay's great, each and every weapon is extensively upgradable to cater to my play style and the occasional QTE only makes it more engrossing because you _can _make good QTE's if you know how.
> 
> ...


 
It is ok if you are having "fun" with this "game". I mean, the "game world"(= atmosphere/story) and the visuals-graphics are what make a game great. I really don't see why its gameplay is great though. It is boring and we have seen it before a thousand times... And what is so great about its level design?Even the weapon upgrades you mentioned are nothing new, and don't make that much of a difference. I think you are easily amazed, probably a young gamer...

As for the atmosphere, actors and story you paid for, you could have watched Walking Dead. Far cheaper and with better visuals. 

Let us talk about games for a change, not movies and tv series...


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> If you'd stop beating the crap out of the dead horse, you'd have realized I was referring to Nintendo being the developer of Mario, compared to Naughty Dog being the developer for Last of Us.
> 
> The fact is Nintendo has been making Mario games for years, while Naughty Dog showed up one day and happened to make games under the Sony systems. When somebody says Nintendo, it's common to think of Mario. But when somebody says Sony, I am definitely not going to fuckin think about Naughty Dog.


Oh yeah, just like Super Smash Bros. which was actually developed by HAL Laboratory, Metroid Prime which was actually made by Retro Studios, Donkey Kong Country which was actually made by Rare/Retro, Pokemon which was actually made by Gamefreak etc. Not all Nintendo games are made by Nintendo and this is a normal thing, they practically stick to Mario when it comes to exclusive development.

If you want games that are developed exclusively by Sony, have a look at Everquest or something but I don't really see the point because Sony's never been an all-out software developer and that was never their goal.

Sony's idea of video game development is different to that of Nintendo - Sony creates platforms which cater to third-party developers, Nintendo has a strong first-party focus and caters to their in-house developers.



TemplarGR said:


> It is ok if you are having "fun" with this "game". I mean, the "game world"(= atmosphere/story) and the visuals-graphics are what make a game great. I really don't see why its gameplay is great though. It is boring and we have seen it before a thousand times... And what is so great about its level design?Even the weapon upgrades you mentioned are nothing new, and don't make that much of a difference. I think you are easily amazed, probably a young gamer...
> 
> As for the atmosphere, actors and story you paid for, you could have watched Walking Dead. Far cheaper and with better visuals.
> 
> Let us talk about games for a change, not movies and tv series...


​_"It is ok if you are having "fun" with this New Super Mario Bros.. I mean, the "game world" (Mushroom Kingdom) and the visuals-graphics (stylized 2D) are what make a game great. I really don't see why its gameplay is great though. It is boring and we have seen it before a thousand times... (Jumping at bricks, eating mushrooms and walking right all over again). And what is so great about its level design? Even the new power ups you mentioned are nothing new, and don't make that much of a difference. I think you are easily amazed, probably a young gamer..._

_As for the atmosphere, actors and story you paid for, you could have watched a Disney flick. Far cheaper and with better visuals. _

_Let us talk about games for a change, not movies and fairy tales... "_

This is how you sound like. I've been a _"gamer"_ since the NES days, I've got stacks of consoles and loads of _"gaming experience"_, it's just that one of us moved on with the times, the other one stayed in the past and finds faults where others see qualities.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Oh yeah, just like Super Smash Bros. which was actually developed by HAL Laboratory, Metroid Prime which was actually made by Retro Studios, Donkey Kong Country which was actually made by Rare/Retro, Pokemon which was actually made by Gamefreak etc. Not all Nintendo games are made by Nintendo and this is a normal thing, they practically stick to Mario when it comes to exclusive development.
> 
> If you want games that are developed exclusively by Sony, have a look at Everquest or something but I don't really see the point because Sony's never been an all-out software developer and that was never their goal.
> 
> Sony's idea of video game development is different to that of Nintendo - Sony creates platforms which cater to third-party developers, Nintendo has a strong first-party focus and caters to their in-house developers.


I didn't say Nintendo made _all_ those games. Try a different argument next time instead of embarrassing yourself.

By the way you should stop because my original post was in regards to vmm downplaying Nintendo while praising Sony. While it's true Sony has some good games under their belt, THAT DOESN'T GIVE ANYONE THE RIGHT to bash Nintendo simply because they keep making a series of games that sell.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> I didn't say Nintendo made _all_ those games. Try a different argument next time instead of embarrassing yourself.
> 
> By the way you should stop because my original post was in regards to vmm downplaying Nintendo while praising Sony. While it's true Sony has some good games under their belt, THAT DOESN'T GIVE ANYONE THE RIGHT to bash Nintendo simply because they keep making a series of games that sells.


 
I'm hardly embarrased, I'm just poking holes in your argument - quite effectively as well. You don't need anyone's permission to _"bash"_ any given video game company - it's called criticism and it's an integral part of what we like to call _"freedom of speech". _You're entitled to disagree with his points, you're entitled to contest them with your own but don't elevate this to the level of _"rights"_ because that's just your typical Nintendo Martyrology.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> I'm hardly embarrased, I'm just poking holes in your argument - quite effectively as well. You don't need anyone's permission to _"bash"_ any given video game company - it's called criticism and it's an integral part of what we like to call _"freedom of speech". _You're entitled to disagree with his points, you're entitled to contest them with your own but don't elevate this to the level of _"rights"_ because that's just your typical Nintendo Martyrology.


Just like how you like to poke so-called holes into my argument, I poked a simple hole into vmm's. vmm was criticizing Nintendo for making a game series for years (simply because it sells). Hardly sensible or even criticism if you ask me, which is basically the same reason why many people hate Activision for Call of Duty simply because that sold too well.

I'll respect the opinion of a person if they said they hated Call of Duty because the story didn't click with them. But I'll damn well for sure poke holes into their argument if they hated it simply because it made more money than they would in their lifetime.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> Just like how you like to poke so-called holes into my argument, I poked a simple hole into vmm's. vmm was criticizing Nintendo for making a game series for years (simply because it sells). Hardly sensible or even criticism if you ask me, which is basically the same reason why many people hate Activision for Call of Duty simply because that sold too well.
> 
> I'll respect the opinion of a person if they said they hated Call of Duty because the story didn't click with them. But I'll damn well for sure poke holes into their argument if they hated it simply because it made more money than they would in their lifetime.


 
Entirely agreed, however I myself do see a problem when certain _"Mario"_ games bear the _"Mario"_ banner not because they have anything to do with _"Mario"_ as a franchise but because it will guarantee sales - it has a distinct smell of mass production if you ask me. I'm thinking of the fantastic Mini-Mario series and whatnot, but if Mario fans don't see an issue with that, I suppose that's fine.  But as you said it yourself, and it's in fact a very good argument, one can't go criticizing Call of Duty for a constant flow of releases whilst praising another franchise for the exact same thing.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Entirely agreed, however I myself do see a problem when certain _"Mario"_ games bear the _"Mario"_ banner not because they have anything to do with _"Mario"_ as a franchise but because it will guarantee sales - it has a distinct smell of mass production if you ask me. I'm thinking of the fantastic Mini-Mario series and whatnot, but if Mario fans don't see an issue with that, I suppose that's fine.


Forgive me for not being up to date with Nintendo, but what recent Mario game was sold? Off the top of my head, I only remember the 3DS one, Paper Mario. I believe some people wanted a sequel, considering Paper Mario was last on the Wii. Other than that, I don't know of any other recent Mario game (not in development)


----------



## Foxi4 (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> Forgive me for not being up to date with Nintendo, but what recent Mario game was sold? Off the top of my head, I only remember the 3DS one, Paper Mario. I believe some people wanted a sequel, considering Paper Mario was last on the Wii. Other than that, I don't know of any other recent Mario game (not in development)


 
Super Mario Land 3D, Paper Mario 3DS, New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Mario Bros. 2, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon _(if you can consider it a Mario game, that is)_, Mario Kart 7 and Mario & Donkey Kong: Minis on the Move. They cover a wide variety of game genres and the Mario franchise is broad enough to allow for that, so it's not _that_ much of a problem, but hey - instead of packing everything they've got into Mario, it wouldn't hurt to think of a new franchise every now and then.


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Super Mario Land 3D, Paper Mario 3DS, New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Mario Bros. 2, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon _(if you can consider it a Mario game, that is)_, Mario Kart 7 and Mario & Donkey Kong: Minis on the Move. They cover a wide variety of game genres and the Mario franchise is broad enough to allow for that, so it's not _that_ much of a problem, but hey - instead of packing everything they've got into Mario, it wouldn't hurt to think of a new franchise every now and then.


 
That... is quite a lot more than I thought  it looks like Nintendo is in that strange situation, continue making money (Mario) or take a risk (new IP) and probably lose money. I can't fault them for choosing the Mario route


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> That... is quite a lot more than I thought  it looks like Nintendo is in that strange situation, continue making money (Mario) or take a risk (new IP) and probably lose money. I can't fault them for choosing the Mario route


 
People who don't like Mario are probably the same people who don't like Mickey Mouse and it's the same concept. Branding, marketing, selling, there is a reason Nintendo is so profitable even when they are "doomed".

Disney should stop selling Mickey Mouse merchandise, it's the same old schlock all the time! 

Sony should stop selling TV's those damned things are always showing the same crap to me! 

Microsoft should stop making OS's it's always click this click that! 

It get's pretty silly when you look at it from that perspective.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 28, 2013)

About the NO NEW IP THING of Nintendo: Bullshit! There are new IPs regularly its just that YOU dont like them.
Have a list off the top of my head within the last ten years:

Miis
Wii Sports
Wii Fit
Disaster - Day of Crisis (Nintendo owns Monolith thus its a new Nintendo IP)
Xenoblade Chronicles (See above)
Dillions Rolling Western
Yarn (as in Kirbys Yarn and Yoshis Yarn, the Yarn concept is new while being applied to tried characters)
Elite Beat Agents
Rythm Heaven
Steel Diver
Endless Ocean
Art Academy
Captain Rainbow
Wii Music
Wario Ware (Same character completely new concept)
Mario and Donkey Kong Minis (Tried characters new concept)
And thats just off the top of my head. And even if you only count HALF of those, its still a lot and I am sure I missed many. And thats only the last ten years. Strech this to fifteen and you get smash bros, pikmin, chibi robo, eternal darkness ect. also.
Nintendo HAS new I.P.s I'ts just that you tend to ignore them because they dont feature a new character YOU like...


----------



## Rydian (Jul 28, 2013)

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx







If you want GPU usage details, this is always nice.  Just make sure to run it as admin if you're got a game that needs to be run as admin (otherwise it runs in normal mode with no prompt, and thus can only read limited info from admin-run programs).


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 28, 2013)

My main problem with PC gaming is HDD space. I make music AND Videos and those raw files eat up HDD space in no time. I can't afford a new HDD every month to make music, videos AND install games. So I stick with console games. Eventually i'll probably switch to more PC gaming once huge HDDs become cheaper over here...


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 28, 2013)

Foxi4 said:


> Funny. Does Windows record your screen while you play a game at 1080p at all times? I figured as much. That, and the PS4/XBone have shared memory wheras a Windows 8 PC does not - you have to add RAM and VRAM usage together to compare the two.
> 
> As for the setup, it doesn't seem to be unreasonable at all.
> 
> 4.5GB RAM is used for game resources, code, textures, sound and whatnot, 1GB is used for shared _"flexible memory"_ - this is where you introduce interactions between the game proper and the PlayStation ecosystem, of which the OS is the entry point. Finally you're left with 2.5GB memory for the screen capture and the OS. Not bad, not bad at all.


 

Umm, I run the MSI Afterburner video application and it uses almost no resources to record and I do lots of recording. It still seems like both operating systems in the consoles use an excessive amount of memory for how primitive they generally are.


----------



## Rydian (Jul 28, 2013)

DSGamer64 said:


> Umm, I run the MSI Afterburner video application and it uses almost no resources to record and I do lots of recording.


... task manager/process explorer screenshot?


----------



## FAST6191 (Jul 28, 2013)

DSGamer64 said:


> Umm, I run the MSI Afterburner video application and it uses almost no resources to record and I do lots of recording. It still seems like both operating systems in the consoles use an excessive amount of memory for how primitive they generally are.


Seen as I somehow ended up with an MSI card in this rig I might have to have a little look.

What Rydian said but also what settings are you recording with? By default it looked like some fairly low power, high hard drive space settings. I imagine the PS4 will probably go straight for something in the H264 world.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 28, 2013)

If the games are streamed through the cloud, why would they need to record a video? They could just record the movements and stream those through the clud in the game enginge, engating the use of video - similar to what Blizzard is already doing for years with StarCraft II...


----------



## CrimzonEyed (Jul 28, 2013)

If you don't like it, why bother with it.  Didn't come to this thread to read about veteran vs young vs casual vs hardcore gamers. Keep to the topic and take the fight about what defines a game or not to eof.


----------



## Rydian (Jul 28, 2013)

EzekielRage said:


> If the games are streamed through the cloud, why would they need to record a video? They could just record the movements and stream those through the clud in the game enginge, engating the use of video - similar to what Blizzard is already doing for years with StarCraft II...


Because Youtube totally knows how to interpret those files, right?


----------



## VMM (Jul 28, 2013)

jagerstaffel said:


> Did you just call the recent Batman games "bad"? I don't even have to point out the difference between Nintendo _developing_ the Mario games, and Sony _paying somebody_ to make Last of Us.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I meant good, dunno what happened 



jagerstaffel said:


> If you'd stop beating the crap out of the dead horse, you'd have realized I was referring to Nintendo being the developer of Mario, compared to Naughty Dog being the developer for Last of Us.
> 
> The fact is Nintendo has been making Mario games for years, while Naughty Dog showed up one day and happened to make games under the Sony systems. When somebody says Nintendo, it's common to think of Mario. But when somebody says Sony, I am definitely not going to fuckin think about Naughty Dog.


 

Naughty Dog has always been with Sony, remember of Crash Bandicoot for Playstation 1.



jagerstaffel said:


> Just like how you like to poke so-called holes into my argument, I poked a simple hole into vmm's. vmm was criticizing Nintendo for making a game series for years (simply because it sells). Hardly sensible or even criticism if you ask me, which is basically the same reason why many people hate Activision for Call of Duty simply because that sold too well.


 

I think you got me wrong, I'm criticizing Nintendo for overusing Mario on every way(wether it's playing Tenis, Golf, Basket or playing Olympics with Sony).
Nintendo find every possible way to use Mario on nonsense games, but they do not create a new IP over a decade,
while Sony still keep creating new high quality IPs. They still use their famous franchises like Gran Turismo and God of War,
but still are innovative and create games like Last of Us.

As long as it sells, they will keep doing it, and I understand it completely, but as a gamer, with a critical point of view,
I can't say I like what they keep doing with Mario franchise.
The time they waste creating these games could be spent on creating new and unique IPs, and that's my critic.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jul 29, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Because Youtube totally knows how to interpret those files, right?


 

of course not, but CAN you upload those videos to youtube? hasnt tehy said they would just be uploaded to their own service?

edit:
i posted a list of new IPS this decade alone above, glad you people ignore that completely-.-


----------



## jagerstaffel (Jul 29, 2013)

VMM said:


> Naughty Dog has always been with Sony, remember of Crash Bandicoot for Playstation 1.


My main point was they didn't start under Sony, they were bought by them.



> I think you got me wrong, I'm criticizing Nintendo for overusing Mario on every way(wether it's playing Tenis, Golf, Basket or playing Olympics with Sony).
> Nintendo find every possible way to use Mario on nonsense games, but they do not create a new IP over a decade,
> while Sony still keep creating new high quality IPs. They still use their famous franchises like Gran Turismo and God of War,
> but still are innovative and create games like Last of Us.
> ...


 
I admit I was uninformed about how many Mario games there were. But ezekiel posted an interesting list of games that reach other genre's as well. So, it might actually be another interesting strategy Nintendo is doing: making both Mario games and new IPs. If one makes a loss, at least Mario covers it, right? At the same time they make money, they inject a new game as well.

So anyways, about the topic, I read about developers might get spoiled about that much available RAM, I kind of agree with that only on the basis that the recent generation's max was 512MB, to suddenly go to 4GB and not have enough, certainly looks like a lack of optimization to me. I can count a few PC games that could use that much.


----------



## VMM (Jul 29, 2013)

EzekielRage said:


> About the NO NEW IP THING of Nintendo: Bullshit! There are new IPs regularly its just that YOU dont like them.
> Have a list off the top of my head within the last ten years:
> 
> Miis - *not even a game *
> ...


 
Most of these franchises are acquired by Nintendo, they only publish them.
My point is, Nintendo could be developing new franchises, instead of overusing Mario on games that do not have anything to do with him.
When Nintendo announced Pikimin everybody was surprised and excited with it,
what if Nintendo started focusing on creating new franchises rather than doing a Mario and Sonic at the Olympics?




jagerstaffel said:


> My main point was they didn't start under Sony, they were bought by them.


 
And how does that diminish Sony?
Most Nintendo franchises are developed by other studios, yet we still consider them part of Nintendo's IPs.



jagerstaffel said:


> So anyways, about the topic, I read about developers might get spoiled about that much available RAM, I kind of agree with that only on the basis that the recent generation's max was 512MB, to suddenly go to 4GB and not have enough, certainly looks like a lack of optimization to me. I can count a few PC games that could use that much.


 
Developers these days are spoiled as hell.
Bayonetta on PS3 is the perfect example of developer lazyness.
Most multiplat games look better on X360 because devs don't even take time to do a decent port.
4.5GB of unified RAM should be more than enough for the next decade easily,
no matter how much unnoptimized the game is, I still can't see it using 5.5 GB of unified RAM,
especially considering it is GDDR5

PS4 now uses a architecture that everybody knows how to code,
it has a unified GDDR5 RAM memory, yet we don't know much details about the GPU,
it seems there is no more excuses for developers to make bad ports


----------



## urbanman2004 (Oct 2, 2013)

I don't see what all the complaints are for. 4.5GB is more than plenty. Even a PC needs at the most 4 gigs (at the  highest bus speed/freq) for a game to be able to run smooth/efficient.


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 2, 2013)

urbanman2004 said:


> I don't see what all the complaints are for. 4.5GB is more than plenty. Even a PC needs at the most 4 gigs (at the highest bus speed/freq) for a game to be able to run smooth/efficient.


Really....


----------



## urbanman2004 (Oct 2, 2013)

Xexyz said:


> Really....


Yes really. I hope you're being sarcastic


----------



## Xexyz (Oct 2, 2013)

urbanman2004 said:


> Yes really. I hope you're being sarcastic


You bumped a 2 month topic.


----------

