The Xbox One Thread - One X & One SXBOne 

  • Thread starter Robin
  • 5,072 comments
  • 276,777 views
Using the Kinect for voice chat is terrible at the moment. If you are in a game chatting with no headset, the other person can't really understand you unless the TV volume is super low. I'm sure most of us like to keep the volume up. Maybe they've found a way around this, but I don't see how.
 
They seem to be supporting some 3rd party headphones though, new Turtle Beach models and Polk. Never heard of the later. There's also a Polk sound bar and a Madcatz fightstick.

Sorry if you already have all this info, not really been following the whole thread.
 
They seem to be supporting some 3rd party headphones though, new Turtle Beach models and Polk. Never heard of the later. There's also a Polk sound bar and a Madcatz fightstick.

Sorry if you already have all this info, not really been following the whole thread.
Polk is some of the best audio equipment I have ever owned. Surprised you have never heard of Polk. :dunce:
 
Yeah Polk has been around for a long time and have a very good name for quality over the years though they have made some cheap crap as well.

I hate the idea of Kinect for chat, I can just imagion all the background noise that will be coming through. Most people are going to be sitting at least a few feet away and it is likely to be near the TV so the TV is going to come through the chat as well as any other person who walks in the room and starts talking, dog if you have one maybe even a hard rain or whatever.

There was one guy I used to race with that did not use a headset. Not sure what it was he used but it had a mic and I think he set it n the coffee table in front of him and it was really bad. You could hear his wife, his kids, his dog, the phone, the tv, the doorbell and any other noise in the room. No choice but to mute him in game.

My headset picks up my voice and rarely any background noise, sometimes someone may hear my phone ring but that is pretty much it. Much better than a mic setting some feet away.
 
With my surround sound there is no way I would be able to use the Kinect as a headset. So with that said, I will just use a regular headset.
 
That looks incredible! I wish PD was able to create a game that looks and sounds as exciting as that:grumpy:

Who says they can't, the problem is them getting out of their own way and ego to make it happen. T10 seem to want to do what the fans ask and expand on things that their fans might not have imagined. PD listens to fans but seems to do the bare minimum so they can say they did it, but still keep their vision for GT alive.

PD is fully capable of making an epic game, just don't tell them how to do it is the problem I think.
 
I thought that video was average at best. Boring to watch. Pretty to look at, but that doesn't mean much at the end of the day. I don't find over the top lighting and AI crashing exciting. Going through Eau Rouge side by side is exciting. I don't need dash reflections to get that...
 
The AI looks better, but they still brake at points where an average good driver wouldnt. Because the AI uses the braking zones from the braking line. At least in previous FM-titles. The problem is, that some online-players really stick to it too and then you have somebody braking in front of you where you wouldnt expect it. I hope that gets better.

The AI-breaking was always the weak point in FM. If they get that right, the AI could be really fast and challenging.
 
Also the cars still look very unbalanced and very back end happy (oversteer) so that doesn't make me look too forward to the game, also if you watch the start of the vid around the first couple bends you'll see the white trees randomly disappear and a green tree behind it...let's hope they fix that.
 
Also the cars still look very unbalanced and very back end happy (oversteer) so that doesn't make me look too forward to the game, also if you watch the start of the vid around the first couple bends you'll see the white trees randomly disappear and a green tree behind it...let's hope they fix that.

Yeah absolutely! Cars between 700-1200 hp should not have oversteer at all. Very unrealistic.:sly:

Not every game comes with race softs...
 
With all this talk of Kinect always on, I am sure there is joke to be found somewhere in this article.:)

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/researchers-utilize-kinect-to-steer-cockroaches-on-autopilot/

Researchers from North Carolina State University are utilizing Kinect technology to steer cockroaches on autopilot, with a computer moving the cockroach through a controlled environment. The researchers are taking advantage of the video game technology to determine how cockroaches react to the remote control
 
The AI looks better, but they still brake at points where an average good driver wouldnt. Because the AI uses the braking zones from the braking line. At least in previous FM-titles. The problem is, that some online-players really stick to it too and then you have somebody braking in front of you where you wouldnt expect it. I hope that gets better.

The AI-breaking was always the weak point in FM. If they get that right, the AI could be really fast and challenging.
I think Drivatar will reflect that, given that it will be copying all those people.

On the other hand, you could also find yourself up against Drivatars programmed from those of us who drive with the racing line off. :)
 
I think Drivatar will reflect that, given that it will be copying all those people.

On the other hand, you could also find yourself up against Drivatars programmed from those of us who drive with the racing line off. :)

I'm hoping that you will be able to choose which Drivatar you race against in a lobby. Say for instance, I want to run a private lobby, but I only have 8 players, I can choose another 8 Drivatars to race against to fill the lobby up.
 
Yeah absolutely! Cars between 700-1200 hp should not have oversteer at all. Very unrealistic.:sly:

Not every game comes with race softs...

Why do you assume that I'm a massive GT fan that has no idea how cars work? I mean I know you are being sarcastic but even though, that is quite offensive I must say.

Also when was the last time a McLaren MP4-12C had any where close to 1200hp or much less 700, on a good day it 580 is going to the tires. Also it's a McLaren and with Brake Steer f1 technology...the car has a much more balanced drive than a Viper with 650hp. Like I said the driver had to hack at the wheel to keep the car under control, you could clearly see the AI brake early (signs of following in game race line). Let's not get defensive over obvious issues that can and probably will be fixed.
 
Let it be remembered that the physics engine in these early builds does not represent the final product in FM5. As Dan said during E3, the demo is running a hybrid of some of the Calspan data along with data from the FM4 physics engine. This could be why the MP4-12 seems so "twitchy". Like CorvetteGT2 said above, it's an obvious issue that can and probably will be fixed.
 
Like I said the driver had to hack at the wheel to keep the car under control, you could clearly see the AI brake early (signs of following in game race line). Let's not get defensive over obvious issues that can and probably will be fixed.
It is my assumption that if you never ever played online then the Cloud AI would just be regular AI. That being said, I'm guessing that since the game isnt out, they probably wouldnt have many people for the AI to learn off of, therefore causing some AI to just follow a line.

Could be totally wrong though, just throwing it that out there.
 
As far as the twitchy look of the steering in the video goes. It looks to me like the driver was using a controller and just was not very smooth with it.

As for the oversteer, Forza has always had some serious oversteer issues with certain cars and the McLaren has been in that group each time. I know of course that high powered RWD cars will have a strong power oversteer but there is something else going on with some of the cars in Forza, they just don't seem to be balanced right and the rear will jump out in sweeping corners in or out of the throttle. Mclaren is a good example as is the Rossion Q1. There are other very high powered cars in game which are much more stable than these.
 
As far as the twitchy look of the steering in the video goes. It looks to me like the driver was using a controller and just was not very smooth with it.

As for the oversteer, Forza has always had some serious oversteer issues with certain cars and the McLaren has been in that group each time. I know of course that high powered RWD cars will have a strong power oversteer but there is something else going on with some of the cars in Forza, they just don't seem to be balanced right and the rear will jump out in sweeping corners in or out of the throttle. Mclaren is a good example as is the Rossion Q1. There are other very high powered cars in game which are much more stable than these.

It's as if there are no weight to the cars, the tyres don't feel connected to the road either.

As for more high powered cars being stable, in my opinion it was because they had more downforce, in reality without the extra downforce they would of suffered the same problems. These problems are easier to recognize when using a wheel, some cars were a nightmare to drive.

Sure seems to be worse in FM4 compared to other games in the series, due to the problems with using a wheel on FM4 anyway it put me off playing for a year, the Xbox update that affected the wheels was the last time I tried using a wheel on that game. FM4 was a mess for wheel users from the start in my opinion, others felt the same and either went to PC or GT5.
 
Forza 4 lets go of the rear end too easily, but once you're sideways you have supernatural control over the yaw of the car, allowing you to save slides that should have been lost to a spin. The two effects make for a drift-happy game. Professional drivers have noted as much:
http://www.virtualr.net/tim-schrick-tries-forza-motorsport-4
As part of German TV show “Turbo”, race car driver Tim Schrick got to try BMW’s new M5 F10 on the Nürburgring Grand Prix Ciruit and in Forza Motorsport 4.

...Schrick claims to not have substantial experience with driving games and struggles to meet the real lap time in Forza Motorsport 4...

...Perhaps most interestingly, Tim points out that the virtual BMW has less traction and grip than the real car, adding to the list of race drivers that have voiced that many racing games offer too little grip to make the driving more challenging.
 
It's as if there are no weight to the cars, the tyres don't feel connected to the road either.

As for more high powered cars being stable, in my opinion it was because they had more downforce, in reality without the extra downforce they would of suffered the same problems. These problems are easier to recognize when using a wheel, some cars were a nightmare to drive.

Sure seems to be worse in FM4 compared to other games in the series, due to the problems with using a wheel on FM4 anyway it put me off playing for a year, the Xbox update that affected the wheels was the last time I tried using a wheel on that game. FM4 was a mess for wheel users from the start in my opinion, others felt the same and either went to PC or GT5.

I agree with this, the best way I could put this is the car seemed to be on a wet circuit almost with low grip levels, but as I keep saying it's not a complete build I'd surmise just a quick promo to get people happy.
 
Well-placed development sources have told Digital Foundry that the ESRAM embedded memory within the Xbox One processor is considerably more capable than Microsoft envisaged during pre-production of the console, with data throughput levels up to 88 per cent higher in the final hardware.

Bandwidth is at a premium in the Xbox One owing to the slower DDR3 memory employed in the console, which does not compare favourably to the 8GB unified pool of GDDR5 in the PlayStation 4. The 32MB of "embedded static RAM" within the Xbox One processor aims to make up the difference, and was previously thought to sustain a peak theoretical throughput of 102GB/s - useful, but still some way behind the 176GB/s found in PlayStation 4's RAM set-up. Now that close-to-final silicon is available, Microsoft has revised its own figures upwards significantly, telling developers that 192GB/s is now theoretically possible.

So how could Microsoft's own internal tech teams have underestimated the capabilities of its own hardware by such a wide margin? Well, according to sources who have been briefed by Microsoft, the original bandwidth claim derives from a pretty basic calculation - 128 bytes per block multiplied by the GPU speed of 800MHz offers up the previous max throughput of 102.4GB/s. It's believed that this calculation remains true for separate read/write operations from and to the ESRAM. However, with near-final production silicon, Microsoft techs have found that the hardware is capable of reading and writing simultaneously. Apparently, there are spare processing cycle "holes" that can be utilised for additional operations. Theoretical peak performance is one thing, but in real-life scenarios it's believed that 133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4).

The news doesn't quite square with previous rumours suggesting that fabrication issues with the ESRAM component of the Xbox One processor had actually resulted in a downclock for the GPU, reducing its overall capabilities and widening the gulf between graphical components of the Xbox One and the PlayStation 4. While none of our sources are privy to any production woes Microsoft may or may not be experiencing with its processor, they are making actual Xbox One titles and have not been informed of any hit to performance brought on by production challenges. To the best of their knowledge, 800MHz remains the clock speed of the graphics component of the processor, and the main CPU is operating at the target 1.6GHz. In both respects, this represents parity with the PlayStation 4.

In terms of what this all means with regards multi-platform titles launching on both next-gen consoles, our information suggests that developers may be playing things rather conservatively for launch titles while dev tools are still being worked on. This is apparently more of an issue with Xbox One, where Microsoft developers are still in the process of bringing home very significant increases in performance from one release of the XDK development environment to the next. Our principal source suggests that performance targets are being set by game-makers and that the drivers should catch up with those targets sooner rather than later. Bearing in mind the stuttering performance we saw from some Xbox One titles at E3 such as Crytek's Ryse (amongst others), this is clearly good news.

Our information suggests that Microsoft's strategy with the Xbox One operating system and supporting software is to implement all the features first and then to aggressively pursue optimisation - a process that is ongoing and will continue beyond launch. As the performance levels of both next-gen consoles are something of a moving target at the moment, differences in multi-platform games may not become evident until developers are working with more mature tools and libraries. At that point it's possible that we may see ambitious titles operating at a lower resolution on Xbox One compared to the PlayStation 4.

However, clearly it's still early days, and right now these machines remain very much uncharted territory - even for those who've been working with prototype hardware for a long time. Microsoft tells developers that the ESRAM is designed for high-bandwidth graphics elements like shadowmaps, lightmaps, depth targets and render targets. But in a world where Killzone: Shadow Fall is utilising 800MB for render targets alone, how difficult will it be for developers to work with just 32MB of fast memory for similar functions? On the flipside, Xbox One's powerful custom audio hardware - dubbed SHAPE (Scalable Hardware Audio Processing Engine) - should do a fantastic job for HD surround, a task that sucks up lots of CPU time on current-gen console. How does PS4 compare there? And just how much impact does the GDDR5 memory - great for graphics - have on CPU tasks compared to Xbox One's lower-latency DDR3?

While next generation of consoles finally arrive in a matter of months, the launch games will have mostly been developed on incomplete hardware - a state of affairs that was blatantly obvious from titles seen so far. On paper, Sony retains a clear specs advantage, but it was difficult to see that reflected in the quality of the games at E3. Based on what we're hearing about the approach to next-gen development, it could be quite some time before any on-paper advantage translates into an appreciably better experience on-screen.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-xbox-one-memory-better-in-production-hardware
 
Am I correct in thinking that the ESRAM in the XBOX ONE is basically just a smaller chip sitting on a larger chip much like Intel Integrated Graphics?

Waiting for someone to tell me I'm wrong and explain it all. :)
 
Strangely, Sony have considered the embedded RAM approach when they design PS4, but the decided to go with Unified Memory and DDR5.

The PlayStation 3 was very powerful, but its unfamiliar CELL processor stymied developers. "There was huge performance there, but in order to unlock that performance, you really needed to study it and learn unique ways of using the hardware," said Cerny.

That situation led directly to the PS4's design philosophy: "The hope with PlayStation 4 was to have a powerful architecture, but also an architecture that would be a very familiar architecture in many ways."

In fact, this is something Cerny returned to again and again during the conversation. "We want to make sure that the hardware is easy to use. And so having the familiar CPU and the familiar GPU definitely makes it easier to use," he said.

Later, when asked about whether Sony considers the fact that many third party developers will also have to create versions of their games for the next Xbox, his response was, "when I say that our goal is not to create puzzles that the developers have to solve, that is how we do well in a multi-platform world."

But ease-of-use is far from Cerny's only goal. As a 31-year veteran of the industry, he well knows that the PC will march onward even as the PlayStation 4 stays frozen in time.

"Ultimately, we are trying to strike a balance between features which you can use day one, and features which will allow the system to evolve over the years, as gaming itself evolves," said Cerny. The "supercharged PC architecture," that the team has come up with -- to use Cerny's term -- is designed to offer significant gains the PC can't, while still offering a familiar technological environment for engineers.

To design the PlayStation 4, Cerny didn't just rely on research, or postmortems of the PlayStation 3. He also toured development teams and spoke to middleware partners to find out precisely what they wanted to see in a next generation console. The result? You'll read about it below.
What Does 'Supercharged' Mean, Anyway?

The PlayStation 4's architecture looks very familiar, at first blush -- and it is. But Cerny maintains that his team's work on it extends it far beyond its basic capabilities.

For example, this is his take on its GPU: "It's ATI Radeon. Getting into specific numbers probably doesn't help clarify the situation much, except we took their most current technology, and performed a large number of modifications to it."

To understand the PS4, you have to take what you know about Cerny's vision for it (easy to use, but powerful in the long term) and marry that to what the company has chosen for its architecture (familiar, but cleverly modified.) That's what he means by "supercharged."

"The 'supercharged' part, a lot of that comes from the use of the single unified pool of high-speed memory," said Cerny. The PS4 packs 8GB of GDDR5 RAM that's easily and fully addressable by both the CPU and GPU.

If you look at a PC, said Cerny, "if it had 8 gigabytes of memory on it, the CPU or GPU could only share about 1 percent of that memory on any given frame. That's simply a limit imposed by the speed of the PCIe. So, yes, there is substantial benefit to having a unified architecture on PS4, and it’s a very straightforward benefit that you get even on your first day of coding with the system. The growth in the system in later years will come more from having the enhanced PC GPU. And I guess that conversation gets into everything we did to enhance it."


The CPU and GPU are on a "very large single custom chip" created by AMD for Sony. "The eight Jaguar cores, the GPU and a large number of other units are all on the same die," said Cerny. The memory is not on the chip, however. Via a 256-bit bus, it communicates with the shared pool of ram at 176 GB per second.

"One thing we could have done is drop it down to 128-bit bus, which would drop the bandwidth to 88 gigabytes per second, and then have eDRAM on chip to bring the performance back up again," said Cerny. While that solution initially looked appealing to the team due to its ease of manufacturability, it was abandoned thanks to the complexity it would add for developers. "We did not want to create some kind of puzzle that the development community would have to solve in order to create their games. And so we stayed true to the philosophy of unified memory."

In fact, said Cerny, when he toured development studios asking what they wanted from the PlayStation 4, the "largest piece of feedback that we got is they wanted unified memory."

"I think you can appreciate how large our commitment to having a developer friendly architecture is in light of the fact that we could have made hardware with as much as a terabyte [Editor's note: 1000 gigabytes] of bandwidth to a small internal RAM, and still did not adopt that strategy," said Cerny. "I think that really shows our thinking the most clearly of anything."

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191007/inside_the_playstation_4_with_mark_.php

According to what I've read, PS4 also have secondary processor and separate hardware modules, respectively for audio dsp, video encode/decode, Zlib decoder, and upload/download module.

It's interesting that MS decided to adopt eSRAM with only 32MB instead a pure unified memory like Sony did with PS4.
 
Last edited:
The AI look alive though, moving around the track and dicing together, not just droning along in a line.
All of that movement did look good in that respect, however the frequent spin-outs and losing places so the player could move up seemed a bit like a device.

There was also something about the gameplay, a lack of consistency that makes me feel it wouldn't appeal to me. Not an attack on the game, just an observation.

I hope whomever plays this game, enjoys it - it's just not for me.
 

Latest Posts

Back