What are you talking about? It's terrible. PS4 will be the way to go.
From what we can tell, they are both using next to identical hardware.
The main difference is in the motion sensor hardware. Microsoft has opted for a pulse-width-modulated IR emitter/receiver for dynamic range-finding and a 1080p 30 (60?)hz camera while Sony has opted for two smaller resolution parallax cameras with a focal point of 30 centimeters.
Honestly - I think Microsoft will have the advantage when it comes to the motion control, here. Their method allows for time-stamped emissions that can be compiled into very accurate map ranges and definitions. It's sort of a different take on LADAR, if I understand what they are doing, correctly. It will be limited by the sensitivity and the spatial and temporal resolution of their receiver, however.
Sony's is, essentially, an upgraded Kinnect - and that will likely prove quite frustrating. A lot of ambitious games tried to make use of the Kinnect - and found that it simply didn't have the resolution to allow for fine motor controls necessary in a lot of the action games where Kinnect would be most impressive.
What I'm really glad to see, however, is the push
, finally, to 64-bit native code on consoles. With 8 gigs of system memory and 8-core processors; these guys are built for intense X86-64 multithreading with memory addressing for single programs being well over a hundred gigs.
Part of what has been holding PC gaming back is the reluctance to push hard into the 64-bit environments that has been influenced in no small part by the fact that many games and game engines are designed to easily port to the consoles that still rely upon 32-bit memory addressing.
The difference between 32 bit and 64 bit memory addressing is huge, as is what can be done in terms of games (or simulators) with it. Take just about any game on the market, right now. Take all of its levels - all of its map terrain throughout the entire game (include multiplayer maps). That's a lot of stuff for the computer to keep track of. 32-bit memory addressing can only load parts of that (partly why you have loading screens and other breaks in the flow of games) - or about 1 gigabyte of memory; 3 gigabytes for those flagged as "large address aware" (which can become unstable).
Theoretically, if we had the hardware necessary, a 64-bit program could load all the levels of every computer game created to this date, and still have room to spare, directly into RAM.
If you had the processing power for it - you could run every game ever made concurrently on a 64-bit machine with its maximum amount of physical RAM.
So, I'm glad that the consoles have finally gone 64-bit. That means my investment in 32-gigs of RAM will potentially see use this decade outside of coming up with pointless ways to consume it and playing with virtual machines.
My main concern, however, is the ordeal with mandatory installations. Now - it doesn't bother -me- too much... I've largely moved on to online distributions (I've had stuff disappear through moving and because of theft - so I'd rather have my purchases tied to a download service that allows me to make physical back-ups). However - I'm not too sure how they are going to go about the used game market.
And it may just be that the used game market will go the way of the local arcade - confined to more of a specialty/novelty arena as technology and market trends wash the used game stores into the history books.