PS4 Tomb Raider: Definitive and Xbox One indistinguishable

 

By Posted 29 Jan 2014, 10:55

The Xbox One has been getting a bit of a raw deal lately because several of its titles are not able to run at 1080p or 60fps come to that. It was obvious that PS4 owners would try to rub salt into the wounds and tease Xbox One owners, but then again some of them would say that the frame rate is not as important, but would you agree?

We recently pointed out that the PS4 version of Tomb Raider: Definitive was able to run at 60fps consistently, whereas the Xbox One version could only manage 30fps, although was able to increase to 40fps very occasionally.

Also See: Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition crash, FIFA 14 glory

However, VideoGamer says that Square Enix has felt the need to weigh-in and inform gamers that the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One versions of Tomb Raider: Definitive are indistinguishable.

Square Enix said that both next-gen platforms can run the can at 1080p and that their assets, such as character models, particles and textures are equal. This was not in response to the frame rate claims, as they have not said anything about that, but they wanted to set the record straight for those who thought there were other differences between the platforms.

Let’s say that Square Enix is telling the truth, then how come the footage for the Ps4 and Xbox One versions of Tomb Raider: Definitive look different; maybe this will be answered on January 31, which is when the game will be released on both platforms?

PS4 Tomb Raider- Definitive and Xbox One indistinguishable

  • Josh101

    The game is already out on PS4, they released it last week in stores. Apparently they bumped the street date. I’m not sure if it’s out for the XboxOne, but they have been livestreaming on PS4 since Friday. The reason it looks different is because 60FPS is smoother than 30FPS. Which is common sense. Moving left to right on 60FPS will be buttery smooth. On 30FPS it would be “sluggish.” That’s why Call of Duty is made locked at 60FPS, for smooth gameplay.

  • IndubitablyMe

    I’ve tried watching a few “comparison” videos on YouTube but can’t see ANY difference between the two versions. I wonder if the people that keep uploading them realize that videos compressed for YouTube are generally done so at 30FPS (or below) as that is the video standard. Especially at 1080p where the bandwidth required to send 60 progressive frames per second is way beyond what YouTube is willing to support.

    Guess the only way to see the difference would be to have two identical, properly calibrated TVs side-by-side playing the exact same thing at the exact same time from either system. I still think it would still be very difficult to tell the difference between the two, though — especially if they hid the consoles so that the fanboy in you had no idea which was which.

    • Josh101

      ……Twice as many frames a second will not be noticeable..Yeah, sure..

      • IndubitablyMe

        Yes, that’s what I said. People get all caught up in big numbers these days. Pretty soon they’ll have you believing that 180 FPS is necessary for it to be “buttery smooth.” The NTSC standard for video in the US is 29.97 FPS. Are you saying that you notice the TV stuttering every time you watch? What about film being 24 FPS — do movies stutter ridiculously more that regular TV? Ugh… people…

        • Josh101

          The NTSC standard for VIDEO may be 29.97, but that’s not the same for an interactive game. A movie has fixed camera direction, there is no deviation from the fixed position of the camera. On a game like God of War 2 with fixed camera angles, FPS would mean less. But in a game where you have 3D control in non-static environments it makes one hell of a difference.
          ^^
          As I mentioned below, if frames per second didn’t matter, Activision wouldn’t bother with ensuring that all Call of Duty games sustain a constant 60FPS for gameplay. Anyone who plays games competitively would agree. A fighting game such as Mortal Kombat benefits greatly with increased FPS at 60. Anyone who plays interactive games and has played at 30 FPS and 60FPS would agree.

        • IndubitablyMe

          Well you’re entitled to your opinion, so let’s agree to disagree. I can see the FPS being an issue with a fighting game. Killer Instinct looks crazy slick and I’m sure that’s because it’s 60 FPS but it also moves at an insane pace. I’m sure I wouldn’t miss the extra frames in a cinematic game like Tomb Raider as long as the rate stays constant, so I’ll leave it at that.

        • Josh101

          The FPS would still matter in a cinematic game with gunplay, which Tomb Raider has. For accuracy as well as explosions, which Tomb Raider also has lots of explosions. You would be able to see much more detail sustaining 60FPS. There is nothing but benefit to gain from 60FPS. In this case, more is better. Even if you do not believe so.

        • IndubitablyMe

          I never said that more wasn’t better. What I was saying is that less isn’t necessarily worse. Not sure who you’re trying to convince here as I already bought my XB1. I’ll get back to you in a year when I pick up my PS4.

        • Josh101

          You aren’t saying more isn’t better, but are saying less isn’t necessarily worse? In this case, yes, yes it is worse. I’m sure you own an XboxOne and I’m even more sure that you are a reputation manager employed by Microsoft to spread misinformation and to pad negative publicity. I hope they pay you well.

        • Josh101

          I’ll take your silence as an admission of guilt. I’m sure within the NDA reputation managers sign, there is a clause stating you cannot deny or confirm that you are indeed a reputation manager employed by Microsoft or another company. This is solely for the reason of deniability that they did not confirm nor deny said accusation, if you are ever outed and found out.
          ^^
          If anyone reading forums suspects a fellow commentor of such, simply ask them. They will more than likely dance around the question, accuse you, or have you moderated by the website administrator for “trolling” if that’s a clause in their Terms of Service when signing up for said website.

        • IndubitablyMe

          Hahahaha!! Really?? No dude, I didn’t reply because I went home where there were plenty of other things to do besides argue with dumbasses online. I had sex with my wife, played with the kids, wrestled with the dog, and of course watched TV/Netflix/Hulu and played Ryse / Killer Instinct for many an hour on my XB1. You were here every 5 minutes waiting for my response, weren’t you? Pathetic.

          Since I wouldn’t be able to deny my employment by Microsoft (or “another company”) I’ll spell it out for you… I AM NOT A “REPUTATION MANAGER,” whatever the hell that is. Though it does sound like a sweet gig. Where can I apply for a job like that?

        • Josh101

          Nope, there’s this thing called notifications on Discus, you know the comment program you are using right now. Funny thing is you still danced around it.
          ^^
          “Since I wouldn’t be able to deny my employment by Microsoft (or “another company”) I’ll spell it out for you.”/quote
          ^^
          Soo, you indeed work for Microsoft? That is exactly how this reads.

        • IndubitablyMe

          K, here goes again. I do not work for Microsoft. I do not work for any PR firm whatsoever. Wtf is wrong with you? Did your mom drop you as a baby?

        • Josh101

          There’s nothing wrong with me. I was hoping you were a PR manager soo I could believe you aren’t a idiot spreading FUD and misinformation without being paid. But according to you, I’m wrong about you being paid for it. You simply are a idiot and spreading misinformation on your own time. 60FPS is better than 30FPS in every instance. You can see more detail at a higher rate of frames.

        • IndubitablyMe

          All I was stating in my original post, before you went all fanboy on me, is that the average person won’t be able to see much difference. If they did, then everyone would watch OTA HDTV because of less compression vs cable/satellite. But they don’t. My sister still watches SD programming on her 60″ TV because she doesn’t “mind the black bars.” She doesn’t even realize that a few hundred channels up, the exact same program is being shown in 720p. It’s the reason people still buy DVDs — cuz to them, blu-ray isn’t “that much better.” Most people don’t care. If you care then that’s fine, but I don’t.

          I love my XB1 because of how easy it’s made my life for entertainment consumption. I don’t CARE that some games look better on the PS4, just like I didn’t CARE that some games looked better on the 360 vs the PS3. Of course you’re about to turn my words around on my and accuse my of some other BS thing, but I beg of you please just go away!

        • Josh101

          Your first post doesn’t negate your following posts. Anyone who has vision would be able to see the difference between 60FPS and 30FPS if they were shown. That is a fact. People purchasing DVD’s over Bluray’s is completely subjective. They may not have a blu-ray player or an HDTV. HD programming? I don’t even have it because it’s rape for what they charge. Another subjective point. I never said I cared about which system you purchased. My whole point has been there is an absolute difference in 60FPS compared to 30FPS and anyone could see the difference. That is fact.
          ^^
          I haven’t even said anything about you purchasing a Microsoft product, I don’t even care of that instance. But if you wanted to speak of that I’d simply call you an idiot for purchasing from them in the first place. Especially with all the anti-consumer crap they tried pulling last year with no used games, always online, mandatory Kinect hookup with known involvement in the PRISM scandal. Along with paying Youtube personalities for positive review of their products including a NDA stating they cannot divulge they are being paid and their “review” is actually a paid advertisement. But I digress. It’s apparent you don’t care that they attempted to infringe on our rights to First Sale Doctrine, again I digress.

        • IndubitablyMe

          I agreed with your post until you went on to say that “anyone could see the difference,” because that is simply not the truth. I think what you meant to say is that “I see a difference” or even “lots of people see a difference.”

          And your short-sightedness with calling Microsoft’s always-online DRM plan “anti-consumer” proves how much of an idiot you are. There, that’s the first time I’ve called you an idiot, while you’ve called me one many times so far in this conversation. But you truly are dumb if you can’t see how forward-thinking it was. I almost DIDN’T buy one after they 180′d it because I was so pissed that they’d give up their vision so quickly. It was people like you who blew up the internet when they announced it that ruined it for the rest of us who were able to see the big picture.

          You are so quick to make judgments, as is obvious with our conversation above. The YouTube geuerilla advertising campaign paid people to MENTION to XB1 — there was no stipulation that they had to give it a positive review. It is no different than paying to put an Xbox commercial on TV. It raises awareness. If the YouTuber wanted to give it positive accolades, then that was up to their discretion. Much worse has been done in the history of advertising.

          You irritate me to no end.

        • Josh101

          “I agreed with your post until you went on to say that “anyone could see the difference,” because that is simply not the truth.”
          ^^
          Yes, anyone could see the difference. Why wouldn’t they?
          ^^
          “And your short-sightedness with calling Microsoft’s always-online DRM plan “anti-consumer” proves how much of an idiot you are.”
          ^^
          How on Earth is restricting your right to First Sale Doctrine NOT anti-consumer? Really dude?
          ^^
          “there was no stipulation that they had to give it a positive review. It is no different than paying to put an Xbox commercial on TV.”
          ^^
          Interesting, that’s not what the NDA specifically states.

          “You agree to keep confidential at all times all matters relating to this Agreement, including, without limitation, the Promotional Requirements, and the CPM Compensation, listed above. You understand that You may not post a copy of this Agreement or any terms thereof online or share them with any third party (other than a legal or financial representative). You agree that You have read the Nondisclosure Agreement (attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A”) and You understand and agree to all of terms of the Nondisclosure Agreement, which is incorporated as part of this Agreement.”
          ^^
          The big difference is, when you watch a commercial with “Actual Customers” it is stated in the commercial that they were compensated for their “Testimonials.”

        • IndubitablyMe

          I’m done arguing with you. Ugh, do you even read what you copy and paste? That NDA doesn’t state at any point that the reviewer needs to promote the product — it just says that they’re not allowed to disclose that they were compensated. That’s pretty much what a non-DISCLOSURE agreement is.

          This will be my last response to you. And no, that does not mean that I’m avoiding your statement because I’m a “paid employee of Microsoft.” Don’t you have burgers to flip?

        • Josh101

          I love how you keep logging out to give yourself a guest vote. That’s hilariously sad.

        • IndubitablyMe

          Since your last post is still being moderated for whatever reason I will paste what I had written here, but I really shouldn’t because there you go with your accusatory BS again. I’ve logged out and back into this site just as many times as Microsoft has paid me for managing the reputation of the XB1. Anyway, here goes…

          I’m going back on my previous statement of “this will be my last” because that was your first post in which you were not just flinging poo. I enjoy debate but hate ignorance. My opinion can be swayed and I prefer to speak with people whose opinion can also be swayed upon hearing reason.

          Yes, it says you can’t say anything BAD but does not stipulate that you have to say anything GOOD. For example: YouTube video of guy playing COD:Ghosts “Here I am playing Call of Duty Ghosts on my Xbox One, here is a walk-through video of how to get yadayadayada achievement.” Que video. “Thank you for watching.” The end. Guess who’s getting paid… THAT GUY! Guess who didn’t say anything promoting the XB1… THAT GUY!

          If your response to this post is more short-sighted name calling, then my previous statement holds true and this will be my last response.

        • Josh101

          Yes but that is exactly the reason why it is an underhanded tactic. They are compensating someone for not mentioning anything bad about the game, even if there is something they don’t like. The FTC specifically states:
          ^^
          “For purposes of this part, an endorsement means any advertising message (including verbal statements, demonstrations, or depictions of the name, signature, likeness or other identifying personal characteristics of an individual or the name or seal of an organization) that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experiences of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser, even if the views expressed by that party are identical to those of the sponsoring advertiser. The party whose opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience the message appears to reflect will be called the endorser and may be an individual, group, or institution.”
          ^^
          Which Microsoft’s and Machinima’s agreement specifically states you cannot disclose you are being paid for your endorsement of the product. They must disclose that they are being compensated in any shape or form. Any infomercial, commercial or the like must disclose fully if the participants are compensated for their participation.

        • IndubitablyMe

          They could still say something bad about the Xbox, they just wouldn’t get paid. Nobody is forcing their hand. They are free to say anything they like. The only thing that would make it under-handed is if they were paid to say that they liked it when they really didn’t.

          The end-game is not to have a million people say “Xbox is great.” They just want a million people to make the blanket statement of “I’m using it” which is 100% honest because they are, in fact, using it.

          Thank you for not being hostile.

        • Josh101

          Point being, it is turning people with opinions that are respected, into paid advertisements without disclosing the fact that they are being paid. That means if you play ball and don’t mention anything negative you get paid. That is destroying the legitamacy of a review with paid tactics. That is underhanded and sets a dangerous precedent. That in and of itself is anti-consumer. Not to mention all the other tactics Microsoft has attempted in the past year and they should not be rewarded with anyone’s money. All that shows them is it’s ok. Which it is not. Half of the reviews that pop up on google for ANY game are youtube reviews. They are destroying the integrity of non-biased reviews. Not only that, but making the posters of said reviews completely ignore FTC guidelines.

        • Josh101

          Somehow my post was deleted. I wonder why. It does say specifically just that. Which I updated my post with. But, there is a pastebin of the entire NDA. http:// pastebin. com/ vec6vjv5

        • Rick

          Um, well if more is better, then by default, less is worse. Youtube locks the framerate at 30FPS so the comparison isn’t noticeable. The best comparison I’ve found is on IGN – watch it there then make a decision.