How should devs handle ports between consoles? *spawn

[Deleted member 13524]

So anyone who believes this apparently is stupid and Microsoft's statement is now an absolute truth because of course Phil Spencer would acknowledge this on twitter, if it was true.

MS has already made it a significant point that they want to continue focusing on the PC market, why would they all of a sudden decide to gimp their market and freely hand it over to steam?

Microsoft has been making statements about how they're so much focused on the PC market almost every year since the first xbox launched.
Maybe that'll change this time, but all the promises they made so far have become empty and the PC gaming division has historically done more harm than good, again and again.

I only say it might change this time because they may go after a unified gaming experience between Windows 10 on PC and XBox now that the hardware seem to be cross-compatible-ish.
However, Windows 10 is still not here.

Why is Microsoft only mentioned? I thought Sony was also apart of this conspiracy as well?

The redditor in question mentions "console makers" first and then specifies as "MS" afterwards.
But maybe Sony has done some pressure, sure. I don't think that would be any more unbelievable than Microsoft doing it.

 

[iroboto]

You're not stupid. It's just not confirmed. They're saying it's confirmed on Neogaf now because another student verified the talk and being there in person in France. However even that isn't good enough.

You've taken a position that cannot win unless the game ships 30fps locked on PC. At which Phil has already acknowledged it's not true, so why would he then ask for it to ship at 30fps locked? He's basically committing PR suicide.

It's unknown Ubisoft engineer that could have gotten it wrong or poorly communicated his winks thinking they would understand it as something else vs. Phil Spencer head of Xbox.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Oh boy here comes a bloodbath..

http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/2j7r9j/delivering_ubisoft_came_to_my_school_for_a/

Don't shoot the messenger. And please be civil.

lol. Conspiracies. Can't wait to read this nonsense over and over for the next ten years.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So anyone who believes this apparently is stupid and Microsoft's statement is now an absolute truth because of course Phil Spencer would acknowledge this on twitter, if it was true.

It's stupid to take a rumour at face value. The rumour should be the spawning point for further investigation and consideration before forming an opinion. So yes, believing this rumour is stupid when the only reason for doing so is 'somebody said it, so it must be true'. The non-stupid approach may lead to belief in the rumour eventually, but it won't get there in one jump from the off!

 

[tuna]

Regarding the lightning/resolution issue (which is much more interesting than conspiracy rumors) and the missed 60 fps target, I think a lot of that is because the way UBI develop their games. When you have several teams working concurrently you need to be really disciplined about the way you produce your code and assets and constantly set and test performance targets. I do not think UBI is capable of that because they do not have strong enough technical game direction.

 

[FarticusMaximus]

I do not think UBI is capable of that because they do not have strong enough technical game direction.

But wasn't the original AC generally considered a technical tour-de-force?

Sure there was some tearing, but for the time it was released the animation and lighting systems were just superb. It was showing up most 1st party large budget games. I still have the marks on my jaw where it hit the floor at my first sight of Jerusalem.

Then there are the times when I am Kenway, on the Jackdaw in the middle of the ocean with sunlight cutting through very convincing blue-green waves or being buffeted in a tropical storm and I still every now and then say a little 'god damn'.

Then I think that they create these incredibly atmospheric, beautiful moments in an open world game, on a multiplatform engine.

Over-familiarity with the series may have taken the sheen off those moments for many, but from a technical standpoint are these not class-leading developers?

 

[DJ12]

If we take everything at face value that UBI have said, it doesn't add up.

So they are CPU limited, and MS freeing up some resources meant there was only 1-2 fps difference between the consoles, yet their own test proved the xbox one CPU to be considerably stronger, so if it really is CPU limited, xbox one should have considerably higher fps.

And this 25gb of baked lighting doesn't make sense to a layman like me, if you've already baked your lighting, how is that going to impact the CPU, maybe the real limiting factor is the HDD.

Maybe UBI take the approach that as long as people are talking about them, it's a good thing.

 

[function]

~10% faster, which is at most 3fps. And the Xbox Cpu probably suffers more from contention while rendering is going on, so less.

And CPU won't be the only bottleneck even if its the major one.

Nothing about this doesn't add up.

 

[Globalisateur]

If we take everything at face value that UBI have said, it doesn't add up.

So they are CPU limited, and MS freeing up some resources meant there was only 1-2 fps difference between the consoles, yet their own test proved the xbox one CPU to be considerably stronger, so if it really is CPU limited, xbox one should have considerably higher fps.

And this 25gb of baked lighting doesn't make sense to a layman like me, if you've already baked your lighting, how is that going to impact the CPU, maybe the real limiting factor is the HDD.

Maybe UBI take the approach that as long as people are talking about them, it's a good thing.

This CPU test was only benchmarking one particular CPU task (Cloth animation). This obviously doesn't tell the whole story as I assume a whole CPU frame cycle should consist of much more and different stuff to do.

Others benchmarks show indeed different results, depending of the tests done (equality in one or slight advantage for PS4 CPU in another).

The same could be applied for the GPU test which only applies for this specific test.

 

[Delta9]

PS4 should be lead and if Xbone can't hang, drop its settings. I mean, why would you make a game around the weakest console that's also selling far worse? Not to mention that you are completing with every other developer and if they aim for highest spec, you screwed yourself as weaker dev.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I mean, why would you make a game around the weakest console that's also selling far worse?.

Not sure if your trolling. If your customers have an Xbox One then you want to sell them games so they will give you money.

Did that really have to be explained?

 

[Delta9]

Not sure if your trolling. If your customers have an Xbox One then you want to sell them games so they will give you money.

Did that really have to be explained?

OK, why not lock PC down while we are at it. This makes no sense and helps nothing but ones pocket.

 

[goonergaz]

Nothing about this doesn't add up.

Really? Or is it the double negative equals positive!?

So pretty much every multi so far has shown improvements on PS4, and even near the 30-40% being banded around. Even (apparently) Destiny was a similar gap until the MS tech ninjas got the game running better (and let's be honest, it's not pushing the PS4 as much as other titles).

Yet here we are with AC:U where we are being told the 2 versions are very close and this 'adds up' but isn't 'forced parity'? Also consider the previous title released with the same resolution yet PS4 gat a day one patch.

I'd say something doesn't quite add up.

 

[iroboto]

OK, why not lock PC down while we are at it. This makes no sense and helps nothing but ones pocket.

??? One could make an argument that PC has always been in a way locked down. DX11 came out a long time ago. 5 years of graphics features never fully realized by mainstream developers until now.

 

[Delta9]

??? One could make an argument that PC has always been in a way locked down. DX11 came out a long time ago. 5 years of graphics features never fully realized by mainstream developers until now.

Locked to exact parity with console.

Just imagine how far behind you would be if did that. Devs be working on hard problems while you're messing around with parity and being clueless as to what they can do.

 

[goonergaz]

Locked to exact parity with console.

How would you lock a PC which has significantly more power and get away with it? I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say...

 

[function]

This CPU test was only benchmarking one particular CPU task (Cloth animation). This obviously doesn't tell the whole story as I assume a whole CPU frame cycle should consist of much more and different stuff to do.

Others benchmarks show indeed different results, depending of the tests done (equality in one or slight advantage for PS4 CPU in another).

The same could be applied for the GPU test which only applies for this specific test.

This is the most recent example, and from a time when the most xbone CPU is available for games. It follows that results from when more cpu was reserved results would be less favourable for xbox. The only result showing ps4 ahead was from back around launch or something.

Xbox simply has a faster CPU. We have known this since the upclock.

 

[Delta9]

How would you lock a PC which has significantly more power and get away with it? I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say...

Sounds like you agree. A more powerful box deserves more.

 

[function]

Really? Or is it the double negative equals positive!?

So pretty much every multi so far has shown improvements on PS4, and even near the 30-40% being banded around. Even (apparently) Destiny was a similar gap until the MS tech ninjas got the game running better (and let's be honest, it's not pushing the PS4 as much as other titles).

Yet here we are with AC:U where we are being told the 2 versions are very close and this 'adds up' but isn't 'forced parity'? Also consider the previous title released with the same resolution yet PS4 gat a day one patch.

I'd say something doesn't quite add up.

The explanation might not be true, but nothing about it doesn't add up.

Games without cpu significantly impacting on resolution is not evidence that it can't happen, or that this scenario "doesn't add up".

I still expect PS4 to perform better as there will be some areas impacted by gpu, but the 900p target could easily be a legitimate performance based target for the PS4.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

You're not stupid. It's just not confirmed. They're saying it's confirmed on Neogaf now because another student verified the talk and being there in person in France. However even that isn't good enough.

You've taken a position that cannot win unless the game ships 30fps locked on PC. At which Phil has already acknowledged it's not true, so why would he then ask for it to ship at 30fps locked? He's basically committing PR suicide.

It's unknown Ubisoft engineer that could have gotten it wrong or poorly communicated his winks thinking they would understand it as something else vs. Phil Spencer head of Xbox.

It's stupid to take a rumour at face value. The rumour should be the spawning point for further investigation and consideration before forming an opinion. So yes, believing this rumour is stupid when the only reason for doing so is 'somebody said it, so it must be true'. The non-stupid approach may lead to belief in the rumour eventually, but it won't get there in one jump from the off!

I took no position at all, I only re-posted the news because it belongs here. It's just a rumour that may or may not be discussed, that's all. AFAIK there's no forum rule stopping users from posting rumours about the subject at hand.
TBH, I don't think there's enough material to believe anything at all, at least for the moment. There's this picture which kind of proves that this presentation actually happened in a french technical school and that's it:

We'll see if AC:U comes with a 30FPS lock for the PC or not, but Ubisoft's representatives have been making some really awkward statements about that.


All I'll say for now is:
1 - I wouldn't be surprised if this is true. Sony and Microsoft have several billions of dollars invested in their consoles and PC gaming has been climbing up in popularity and sales really fast these last couple of years. With so much money being at stake, all kinds of aggressive tactics can take place within small meetings behind closed doors between publishers and developers. Even more when the PC gaming side has no real representative that would/could take competitors to court for illegal duo/monopolistic measures.
This isn't about being evil. It's business. PC gaming is a sitting duck regarding exclusivity and (un)optimization deals.

2 - A tweet from Phil Spencer saying it's not true means little more than Microsoft's more than obvious official stance on the issue. Was anyone expecting to see Phil Spencer sending a tweet saying "Yes, we're pressuring PC devs to lock the FPS in order to make our console look less bad"?
This is the real world, people, not an imaginary one.