Yes, X1 was 792p. A significant boost for X1 from their last at bat, it just appears they didn't care to do more for PS4 platform since the launch of WD.
How should devs handle ports between consoles? *spawn
- Thread starter onQ
- Start date
Yes, X1 was 792p. A significant boost for X1 from their last at bat, it just appears they didn't care to do more for PS4 platform since the launch of WD.
Or maybe Microsoft provided Ubi some developer ninjas to bump the resolution for the X1 while Sony provided nothing. Perhaps that's how parity was acconplished.
Hey, why not throw out wild conjecture like everyone else.
MS have form for sending out developer Ninjas to assist with key titles. Perhaps the cross promotional AC might be one of them?
Actually, a lot of the talk about improvements to the Bone SDK have focused on speeding up the driver to improve cpu performance and improved tools to help avoid bottlenecks.
Uh oh, it's like some of this might be starting to fit together to form the basis for some conjecture that fits in with how we've seen development progressing this year ..
Or maybe we should simply believe what the producer said about it? That it was not because of a technical reason but a marketing reason probably from him or another producer/executive.
Whatever the reasons, we'll probably never know as everyone is NDA-silenced.
Like when they decided to delay the release of the WII U version of Rayman Legends which was certainly not the decision of Michel Ancel. We know how it panned out: the game was a flop and now Ancel is starting his own company (probably more because of the forced delay than the flop).
Whatever the reasons, we'll probably never know as everyone is NDA-silenced.
Like when they decided to delay the release of the WII U version of Rayman Legends which was certainly not the decision of Michel Ancel. We know how it panned out: the game was a flop and now Ancel is starting his own company (probably more because of the forced delay than the flop).
betternatethanlever
Newcomer
It's the texture aliasing that caught my eye first. Shouldn't that be non-existent now?
He said it was CPU bottleneck. He also said it was to avoid controversy.
If you think we should believe what the producer said, you should remember that he did actually give a technical reason too.
He never made a one to one with the 900P decision and the CPU bottleneck talk. It reads like they are two separate things, one limits the frame rate (CPU) and the other the frame buffer res (politics).
No. He never gave a technical reason for the parity. He only said the CPU limitation explained why the game was only 30fps (and not 100fps lol).
And the fact that the game is CPU limited should not at all explain the parity, quite the contrary!
BF4 was heavily CPU limited too, and there was a ~65% discrepancy between both versions if you roughly added (well multiplied) the resolution and framerate differences. I know it was before the XB1 10% GPU/ 5% CPU boost, but still.
Frame rate and resolution aren't necessarily independent.
Frame buffer resolution increases at a capped frame rate could realistically impact on CPU performance, and push it below an acceptable threshold.
With its faster CPU, more memory available to games, more capable audio co-processors, smartglass and Kinect, it is possible that some aspects of parity will favour PS4 over Xbox One.
But these things are conveniently forgotten by, like, everyone. Holy shit, have you seen the Sony internets?
It's as if millions of voices cried out in entitlement and were suddenly butthurt.
absolutely lol. Personally, I'm just trying to not sound like I don't care for PS4 guys. It's a shame it turned out this way, but honestly I actually see the situation the way you just wrote it.
More performance costs more money. Period. I'm confused on how people finger point at MS because they are 'bringing the performance' of PS4 DOWN, or keeping them held as if there system could trivially run the game at 1080p@30/60fps and money was the only deciding factor here. That's not an investment for MS, and it only harms any goodwill they are trying to build with their potential customer base.
There's just no logic at the moment and a lot of emotions riding. I think in a couple of days/weeks we're going to be a better point for discussion wrt. AC Unity.
Because the entire planet is on the Microsoft payroll, therefore anything bad that happens is clearly because MS paid for it to happen that way. On a different note, threads like this make me so glad I left the games business and moved onto other things.
Eh? Depends what that "more performance" is. If the hardware can run something at higher resolutions and/or better framerates because it has the juice it doesnt necessarily equal to "more costs". Lowering resolution and capping framerate to lower than what the hardware is capable of running doesnt necessarily mean "more money saved" either.
Costs are bound to be more though if a hardware has some bottlenecks or has some peculiarities that require optimization to get the desired result.
Agreed, the latter of your statement was ultimately what I was alluding to.
The xbox one has some advantages over the ps4. So its not suprising to see in some cases the xbox one to come out on top.
If we just want better graphics on xbox360/ps3 games then the ps4 is quite capable of providing that. But perhaps both consoles fall on their faces when it comes time up the stakes on the ai side.
The One has a faster cpu. Its clocked at 150mhz faster than the ps4 and I believe both have 2 cores reserved. The xbox one also has a ton of audio hardware for Kinect and some of it may have gotten opened up with the new lesser focus on the Kinect.
I'd would rather lesser resolution but much better AI interaction than a higher resolution and the same old AI
If we just want better graphics on xbox360/ps3 games then the ps4 is quite capable of providing that. But perhaps both consoles fall on their faces when it comes time up the stakes on the ai side.
The One has a faster cpu. Its clocked at 150mhz faster than the ps4 and I believe both have 2 cores reserved. The xbox one also has a ton of audio hardware for Kinect and some of it may have gotten opened up with the new lesser focus on the Kinect.
I'd would rather lesser resolution but much better AI interaction than a higher resolution and the same old AI
Inuhanyou
Veteran
Ugh. If your pushing the exact same things on screen in terms of CPU, there's obviously going to be a GPU reservation that's left to increase resolution, especially with a 40% advantage.
That power has to go somewhere, its not just locked up where people can't access it, unless your saying you bumped up graphics sliders on PS4 in comparison to X1 and were disallowed from going higher res wise because of that.
Why bother saying anything Ubi? "We didn't want to create any debates", you did by doing this!
That power has to go somewhere, its not just locked up where people can't access it, unless your saying you bumped up graphics sliders on PS4 in comparison to X1 and were disallowed from going higher res wise because of that.
Why bother saying anything Ubi? "We didn't want to create any debates", you did by doing this!
Your still going to need cpu power to increase your resolution. IF your going to the wall on your cpu then increasing res will cause problems
shredenvain
Regular
Ok someone with developer knowledge can correct me if I am wrong, but being that UBI says that the Cpu is a bottleneck for AC Unity on both systems. How can anyone say that they just waste the other 40% of the Ps4 gpu? I am no expert but dont you have to have free cpu cycles and cpu bandwidth to send commands to that other 40% of the gpu to get any use out of it?
Please correct me if I am wrong. I am really interested in finding out.
Please correct me if I am wrong. I am really interested in finding out.
Similar threads
- Locked
