• New Horizons on Maelstrom
    Maelstrom New Horizons


    Visit our website www.piratehorizons.com to quickly find download links for the newest versions of our New Horizons mods Beyond New Horizons and Maelstrom New Horizons!

Uncharted 4 Gameplay (PS4) (Uncharted 4 A Thief's End Gameplay)

That 5960x costs $1,011.99!!!!!! Compare that to the AMD 8350 I am using at $169.99. That is why I will never ever buy Intel again. As far as the cpu is concerned I am set for many years. The video card is the bottleneck and the next one will cost as much as an Intel cpu.

APU or CPU? The AMD APUs are the ones like the A10 7850k that I am building now for a Christmas present. The 4300 is a CPU. The 7850k has a decent video card built into it that gives an overall mid range gaming rig performance.

Aren't the console games locked at 30 fps? I heard that somewhere. PC gamers see 60 fps as the minimum and prefer over 120 fps for smooth game play. That is one reason console games ported to PCs don't work so well. We need extreme hardware to run them at our preferred frame rates.

Yes Macroshaft has been hobbling development of pc gaming. That seems to be the reason Valve is building their own system.
 
Hylie Pistof said:
Aren't the console games locked at 30 fps? I heard that somewhere. PC gamers see 60 fps as the minimum and prefer over 120 fps for smooth game play. That is one reason console games ported to PCs don't work so well. We need extreme hardware to run them at our preferred frame rates.
Click to expand...
Some of them are, particularly from the previous generation, but nowadays most games aim for full HD, 60 FPS performance on the new consoles.
They can't always reach that, and sometimes the Xbox One version has to run at a lower resolution than the PS4 version to keep the same framerate, but developers are gradually getting better at optimising for both consoles.

Linking back to the original topic, I recently read an excellent technical article about how Naughty Dog uses the PS3 and PS4 hardware efficiently:
http://www.redgamingtech.com/ps4-architecture-naughty-dog-sinfo-analysis-technical-breakdown/
It mostly focuses on the specifics of the PS4's architecture, but there's also some insight into how the developer makes do with the constraints they're given.
 
Armada said:
Linking back to the original topic, I recently read an excellent technical article about how Naughty Dog uses the PS3 and PS4 hardware efficiently:
http://www.redgamingtech.com/ps4-architecture-naughty-dog-sinfo-analysis-technical-breakdown/
It mostly focuses on the specifics of the PS4's architecture, but there's also some insight into how the developer makes do with the constraints they're given.
Click to expand...
They want more ram and cores. Maybe, the Naughty Dog's developers already want the PS5xD
 
Hylie Pistof said:
That 5960x costs $1,011.99!!!!!! Compare that to the AMD 8350 I am using at $169.99. That is why I will never ever buy Intel again.
Click to expand...

Believe me mate, I understand completely! Intel's pricing structure is ridicules! Intel released it's first 8 core server chips back in 2011, and COULD have released an 8 core consumer chip as well, but chose to disable 2 cores for "stability" reasons. :rolleyes: When you have no competition, there is no incentive to push it, just milk it for all it's worth, Intel is very good at milking. I still haven't decided I am going to build a new rig yet, but it is getting closer. My current one is still purring away quite nicely, it even supports USB 3 and SATA 3 now!

I have never actually bought an Intel CPU myself, the last one I actually had any dealings with personally was an old 386 back in the late 80's that my Dad had bought at a Hamfest. Our next CPU was an Am486 DX-33, and I have bought nothing but AMD since. Back in 2011, I was even preparing to buy a Bulldozer, then the specs and performance ratings started leaking, and they weren’t much of an improvement over my current 9850, so I passed, hoping AMD would right their ship eventually. 3 and half years later, and there is still no sign that AMD will ever again compete with Intel for pure processing power.

AMD's current best CPU is the FX-9590, a piledriver core released in 2012! It has 8 cores, but only 8 threads. Intel's 5960x has 16, 2 per core. The clock speed on the 9590 is impressive, but clock speed doesn't equate to processing power like it once did. In all the benchmarks I have seen, the 5960x beats the 9590 by at least 40% in most tests! AMD is good for gaming, but if you want to encode or render video, or do some serious graphics work, then you need some serious number crunching. I don't really plan on doing much of that, but I refuse to give AMD any more of my money until they prove they are willing to compete and push the envelope as they once did.

@Armada, looks like an interesting article, I will read it more thoroughly when I get the chance. :read
 
Indeed! This game is shaping up to be visually stunning and a whole lot of fun. :treasure:

What that video doesn't show, of course, is their first attempt to show that demo on stage, when they couldn't seem to get Drake to move at all.
Of all the live demos, it had to be this one that suffered technical difficulties. xD
 
I think this quote from ArsTechnica sums the trailer up pretty well:

We actually got to look at some of it twice, because the presentation froze and had to be restarted—but, hey, at least we got confirmation that it was running live! The demo footage showed Nathan Drake doing the things that he does best—cracking wise, shooting, driving, shooting, cracking wise, shooting, driving, shooting, shooting, cracking wise, and shooting.
Click to expand...
 
I knew there were some problems with the presentation but the most important is the game is really great.:yes
 
This time is not about Uncharted 4 but the remastered version for PS4 of the previous episodes.
Am I the only one who prefers the PS3 version o_O?

 
Well, the PS4 version is definitely much sharper, and the textures are noticeably better. Obviously the lighting has changed, and I guess that's the part where personal preference comes into it. I'm not quite sure which is more realistic. :shrug
 
I've seen a fair few modern games that try to look realistic and have all sorts odd fancy graphics.
But when I look at them, I hardly understand what all that fancy stuff is supposed to represent.
The screen is cluttered with what is supposed to be eye candy, but it just doesn't work for me.
Simple yet effective can look so much better.

And never forget the "uncanny valley": The closer you get to 100% lifelike looks, the more everything that isn't yet quite right stands out.
And often you couldn't even say what it is that looks wrong; something just seems "off".

I remember a documentary about the making of Shrek where they said that at one point they had Princess Fiona look so close to real that they deliberately made her more cartooney as it just didn't seem right anymore.
 
I'm still skeptical about this remastered version :unsure. Fortunately, I'm convinced by the quality of Uncharted 4.
 
The remastered collection is mainly for people who haven't played the original games, anyway. A lot of PS4 owners either didn't have a PS3 or didn't play Uncharted at all.
But yes, Uncharted 4 should be worth the wait. :keith
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top