The fact that it's Windows 7 and not Windows 8 worries me more than the fact that the games are running on Windows.
This isn't anything noteworthy. It's common-practice at press events, even the games at Sony's first PS4 event were running on PCs "equivalent" to the system.
There's nothing sleazy about this though. The Xbox One is still unfinished hardware and not suitable for live demoes at press events. It makes more sense to demonstrate your games on a PC with equivalent specs than an incomplete system.It doesn't matter if it's a common practice. All that matters, is that to the un-informed individual, this is another reason against buying a Xbox One.
This isn't anything noteworthy. It's common-practice at press events, even the games at Sony's first PS4 event were running on PCs "equivalent" to the system.
The use of 'GTX 780s' in the PCs is still an unfounded rumour, haven't heard that being mentioned anywhere else. Even so, I guess an argument can be made that the Xbox One can probably achieve a similar level of fidelity since you're coding to the metal and not constrained by Windows.Yep, indeed. There is however a noteworthy part to the article - the games were running on comletely non-equivalent hardware, meaning on a completely different GPU - that's not common practice at all since different GPU's render graphics slightly differently. This means that the final product will vary from what was shown on the presentation.
But they lied about it:There's nothing sleazy about this though. The Xbox One is still unfinished hardware and not suitable for live demoes at press events. It makes more sense to demonstrate your games on a PC with equivalent specs than an incomplete system.
The use of 'GTX 780s' in the PCs is still an unfounded rumour, haven't heard that being mentioned anywhere else. Even so, I guess an argument can be made that the Xbox One can probably achieve a similar level of fidelity since you're coding to the metal and not constrained by Windows.
I meant the actual fashion in which the GPU renders graphics - there is a difference between NVidia-rendered and ATi/AMD-rendered graphics, although one has to have a keen eye to spot them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=b4OcforH9Hk
When you watch the image closely, you can see that the NVidia side of the comparison has brighter colours while the Radeon side is darker, but somewhat more defined. That being said, the NVidia side is winning hands-down in terms of FPS. The textures are handled better of the NVidia side, however shadows look much more realistic on the Radeon side... but then again, that's nitpicking - my point was that this presentation in no way represents how XBox One games will look or play like since many elements will have to be adjusted before the final builds are made - the hardware you're presenting things on should at the very least be similar to that of the console.
Yes, but you can't buy similar hardware to a custom designed dedicated gaming GPU. You're talking about one of the largest software and electronics companies in the world, they didn't make some stupid mistake here, every aspect of their E3 presence has been meticulously planned, the MS dude with the cabinet door open isn't even trying to hide what's in there - why not? Because there's nothing to hide.
...oh yes, I'm sure that the closest match they had to an AMD-made "custom" GPU based on existing AMD designs was an NVidia GPU.
I noticed a couple "Window Error" sounds from sum Videos and Demos......Thats Highlarious