PS4 Pro is like a 5 years old PC and holding developers back...

[CrimsonShadow]

Amnesia is the greatest horror game I've played has maybe one real jumpscare

I don't know how to properly explain this, but Amnesia is incredibly campy/cheesy compared to something like Silent Hill 1. Silent Hill just felt more.. Real..

It's like there's an aura of seriousness to it that isn't there in a game like Amnesia. Kind of like The Last of Us, but obviously not quite to that level of narrative detail.

Amnesia feels like a crazy fantasy world, and that's cool, but it's not quite the same if you get what I mean.

 

[aj1701]

This is a discussion about the impact of the weak tech of consoles using technology from years ago, holding back game design.

Ya, so what? Consoles are not going away, PCs are more expensive and can be a ton more trouble (I spend all day on computers building software, and even putting together everything yourself eventually SOMETHING happens that f's it up and needs troubleshooting).

So its true, and its not going away, so there seems little point in a dev whining about it, and less point in discussing it. If it really bothers this dev so much, then he should just go and make his games PC only. He's crying though because he wants to make the same amount of money and doesn't want to HAVE to deal with consoles to too so. Tough shit.

 

[God Confirm]

Ya, so what? Consoles are not going away, PCs are more expensive and can be a ton more trouble (I spend all day on computers building software, and even putting together everything yourself eventually SOMETHING happens that f's it up and needs troubleshooting).

So its true, and its not going away, so there seems little point in a dev whining about it, and less point in discussing it.

That's terrible logic. We discuss things to improve our knowledge on the matter and build our awareness, even if we personally can't change it. I don't understand the obsession people have nowadays with AVOIDING information. This thread alone is proof that what the dev said here is not common knowledge at all. Regardless, to say it can't be changed or is not going away is also not concrete at all. XBox One X seems to be making great strides towards trying to bridge this gap again, as I said in the post you quoted, which you'd know if you had read the whole thing and not just the opening line.

If it really bothers this dev so much, then he should just go and make his games PC only. He's crying though because he wants to make the same amount of money and doesn't want to HAVE to deal with consoles to too so. Tough shit.

Look at that, even you aren't aware of what the dev is saying. Thats the entire point. You develop for all 3 platforms, you cut your graphics to fit them on to all platforms. Or, you develop for the technology thats available, cut and cut out 2/3s of the platforms from your consumer base, meaning you will be able to spend far less on development than you would otherwise to still maintain a profit, and will probably end up with even worse graphics due to budget. The current state of consoles is holding back what developers are currently capable of doing. Read through this thread and find that link about what Witcher 3 and these guys had to go through, its not just that they are incapable of running games developed for modern day machines, its also that optimization demands for weaker console tech is currently making extra work for developers and costing resources that could be spent elsewhere.

 

[aj1701]

And it's not just graphics. Load times, framerates, draw distances, etc. Are all being held back.

Uh, all of those except load times are graphics related. And I fail to see why a PC would load a game SLOWER than it could because the game needs to run on a console. That just flat out doesn't make any sense.

This argument is just silly though; without consoles in the picture, devs would probably just spend less time optimizing their games, so they'd still be including switches to scale things down to run on normal PC specs.

 

[aj1701]

That's terrible logic. We discuss things to improve our knowledge on the matter and build our awareness, even if we personally can't change it. I don't understand the obsession people have nowadays with AVOIDING information. This thread alone is proof that what the dev said here is not common knowledge at all. Regardless, to say it can't be changed or is not going away is also not concrete at all. XBox One X seems to be making great strides towards trying to bridge this gap again, as I said in the post you quoted, which you'd know if you had read the whole thing and not just the opening line.

What's there to improve? We all know and understand games need to be able to run on the console, and that means making compromises. The developer has not said a single thing that hasn't been said before. Its like PC gamers keep complaining that they sky is still blue. Get over it already, the horse is dead and reduced to particles, you can stop hitting it already.

XB1X isn't going to change anything; its certainly not going to be comparable to a current PC, let alone a high end one (if they want to actually sell them, that is). PS4/PS4P aren't going away, so games are still going to be made to run on them as well. Hell, even if consoles went away, devs would STILL have to target older computers. Again, unless they don't actually want to sell their game.

Look at that, even you aren't aware of what the dev is saying. Thats the entire point. You develop for all 3 platforms, you cut your graphics to fit them on to all platforms. Or, you develop for the technology thats available, cut and cut out 2/3s of the platforms from your consumer base, meaning you will be able to spend far less on development than you would otherwise to still maintain a profit, and will probably end up with even worse graphics due to budget. The current state of consoles is holding back what developers are currently capable of doing. Read through this thread and find that link about what Witcher 3 and these guys had to go through, its not just that they are incapable of running games developed for modern day machines, its also that optimization demands for weaker console tech is currently making extra work for developers and costing resources that could be spent elsewhere.

Get over yourself, I'm aware of what the dev is saying. I already acknowledged that what he said is true. Its just that I view him as crying about the state of affairs. Frankly, it was stupid for the Witcher devs to do as much as they did. They should have known that the next gen (at the time) consoles wouldn't be able to do it... consoles have ALWAYS been behind. Its just not going to change. People buy them because they are cheaper and just work.

I'm surprised the article didn't also complain we don't have rooms that move the floor under us so we can have true freedom of movement in VR games. I mean, that's really holding them back don't you think?

 

[God Confirm]

Uh, all of those except load times are graphics related. And I fail to see why a PC would load a game SLOWER than it could because the game needs to run on a console. That just flat out doesn't make any sense.

yet its exactly what happened with SFV.


as explained by high profile game devs, releasing a far better quality product on PC will cause console players to give their version immensely bad feedback because their version is so much shitter. So what's the solution? They can't make it run any better on console, so they make the PC version match it. It's not the only, but just another reason why console's getting complacent with tech has been holding back video game quality.

This argument is just silly though; without consoles in the picture, devs would probably just spend less time optimizing their games, so they'd still be including switches to scale things down to run on normal PC specs.

which means they'd be playable in all their glory on the machines and scaleable down for weaker PCs, and all at less effort for the devs, and greater graphical cap in design. How is that a bad thing? Isn't this exactly what this article is saying?

What's there to improve? We all know and understand games need to be able to run on the console, and that means making compromises. The developer has not said a single thing that hasn't been said before. Its like PC gamers keep complaining that they sky is still blue. Get over it already, the horse is dead and reduced to particles, you can stop hitting it already.

XB1X isn't going to change anything; its certainly not going to be comparable to a current PC, let alone a high end one (if they want to actually sell them, that is). PS4/PS4P aren't going away, so games are still going to be made to run on them as well. Hell, even if consoles went away, devs would STILL have to target older computers. Again, unless they don't actually want to sell their game.

.... you really need to go back and read my post, which you blatantly still haven't done. I said that too, that Sony needs something to compete with the XBox One X or games still get held back by the weakest link.

Nobody is saying consoles will go away. We are saying though that they CAN start competing with current technology, at least to the level that they once did. And XB1X is proving that statement, I've never bought an XBox in my life but it's specs are amazing for the price point in comparison to how other consoles are being made these days. We CAN point to whats holding back game design without console fans whiteknighting and trying to shut down the discussion. If it doesn't interest you and you have no cares for what and why games are no longer currently being developed with our current level of technology in mind, then don't post in here. You complain that nothing will change so we shouldn't say anything, but discussion isn't going to stop just because you don't want to hear it, so maybe you should take your own advice, because people will talk about the FACTS of the matter whether you like it or not.

I'm surprised the article didn't also complain we don't have rooms that move the floor under us so we can have true freedom of movement in VR games. I mean, that's really holding them back don't you think?

I dunno, does 1/3 house designs already have a room made with a moveable floor in them, and devs are out here saying how much they really want to design games to be played on all these moveable floor houses, but VR games have to be designed with the other 2/3 platforms in mind to be able to actually get made? That's the equivalent you would be looking for, I think the answer would be "yes, its holding them back". The whole point here is that this ISNT some space age tech devs want to design for - its whats currently very possible and already in the majority of gamers houses, but as consoles continue to be less and less competitive with PC standards, it begins to hold back development potential more and more.

The statement that "the gap between console and PC tech will never change" actually holds some ground. Its potentially false and completely unsubstantiated as it already has been shown to fluctuate, and absolutely no reason to shut down discussion, but hey at least its not factually incorrect, its just speculation. But are you actually trying to say with that ridiculous analogy, that right NOW, they AREN'T holding them back, even if the face of all logic and facts proving otherwise, including statements and quotes from multiple devs in this thread alone and tons of examples? lol. It's just a rejection of reality of reality, because you don't like a factual statement that is necessarily unflattering to consoles.

 

[VSC_Supreme]

Uh, all of those except load times are graphics related. And I fail to see why a PC would load a game SLOWER than it could because the game needs to run on a console. That just flat out doesn't make any sense.

I went off on a tangent of what I disliked about consoles, was my bad, I should have specified.

 

[aj1701]

yet its exactly what happened with SFV.


as explained by high profile game devs, releasing a far better quality product on PC will cause console players to give their version immensely bad feedback because their version is so much shitter. So what's the solution? They can't make it run any better on console, so they make the PC version match it. Just another reason why console's are holding back video game quality.

And again, so what? That's life buddy, there are tons of things that could be better but for various reasons aren't. Get over it.

which means they'd be playable in all their glory on the machines and scaleable down for weaker PCs, and all at less effort for the devs, and greater graphical cap in design. How is that a bad thing? Isn't this exactly what this article is saying?

What a joke. The people on lower spec PCs will bitch and give the game bad reviews because it doesn't look like the demos/ads. People on PCs already complain "oh I wish I could play the game but I can't afford a new video card." This argument is irrelevant.

.... you really need to go back and read my post, which you blatantly still haven't done. I said that too, that Sony needs something to compete with the XBox One X or games still get held back by the weakest link./

I did read your post. Its nonsense.

Nobody is saying consoles will go away. We are saying though that they CAN start competing with current technology, at least to the level that they once did. And XB1X is proving that statement, I've never bought an XBox in my life but it's specs are amazing for the price point in comparison to how other consoles are being made these days. We CAN point to whats holding back game design without console fans whiteknighting and trying to shut down the discussion. If it doesn't interest you and you have no cares for what and why games are no longer currently being developed with our current level of technology in mind, then don't post in here. You complain that nothing will change so we shouldn't say anything, but discussion isn't going to stop just because you don't want to hear it, so maybe you should take your own advice, because people will talk about the FACTS of the matter whether you like it or not.

They cannot compete with current PC technology and remain in the same price range. Someone else here said it; the PS3 tried and it was a huge detriment to sales. That's why this current gen are so similarly speced. XB1X isn't proving anything, its not out yet. But please, go ahead and keep crying over a non-issue.

I dunno, does 1/3 house designs already have a room made with a moveable floor in them, and devs want to design games to be played on moveable floor houses, but VR games have to be designed with the other 2/3 platforms in mind to be able to actually get made? That's the equivalent you would be looking for, I think the answer would be "yes, its holding them back". The whole point here is that this ISNT some space age tech devs want to design for - its whats currently very possible, but as consoles continue to be less and less competitive with PC standards, it begins to hold back development potential more and more.

If you think 1/3 of the gaming market is PC, I think you're seriously overstating. And yet again, no one is saying the consoles aren't having an impact, I'm just curious as to why you aren't bitching that VR games are also being held back for whatever reason?

The statement that "it will never change" actually holds some ground. Its potentially false, completely unsubstantiated as it already has been shown to fluctuate, and absolutely no reason to shut down discussion, but hey at least its not factually incorrect, its just speculation. But are you actually trying to say that they aren't holding them back, even if the face of all logic and facts proving otherwise? lol

People have been saying gaming on a PC is better than a console since the NES came out. They complained that games like MK weren't as good as the arcade version (where the arcade machine had more power than the console). (and yes, the PC version of MK1 and MK2 WERE better than the SNES/Genesis versions). Yet here was are, 30 years later, with the exact same topic being bitched about. I already said its true, games are scaled back so they run on the consoles. What i'm trying to get you is GET OVER IT.

 

[aj1701]

I went off on a tangent of what I disliked about consoles, was my bad, I should have specified.

Haha, no problem. Load times on consoles do suck, Prey has horrid load times.

 

[Sutter Pain]

This argument is basically the same as having to dumb down FG's to appeal to casuals for sales. Yeah it sucks but what are you gonna do when its all about the paper.

Roast away

 

[God Confirm]

If you think 1/3 of the gaming market is PC, I think you're seriously overstating.

hard to read your post because you fucked up the formatting so bad, but this gem here jumped out to me

https://mygaming.co.za/news/features/89913-there-are-1-8-billion-gamers-in-the-world-and-pc-gaming-dominates-the-market.html
http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf


Do you actually have any knowledge about the things you choose to speak of, or is it all just purely fanboying? Be honest.

And yet again, no one is saying the consoles aren't having an impact, I'm just curious as to why you aren't bitching that VR games are also being held back for whatever reason?

who is bitching? I'm literally only correcting the misinformation in this thread and its called bitching huh. Love the option selects, you can literally never be wrong because to correct one thing, I have to go on some rant about some shit I know and care very little about? If this was a thread about VR being held back for whatever reason (is VR actually being held back?), then its something I don't have the information on, so here's what I would do:

1.) decide whether or not I cared about the issue at hand, and either:
a.) decide that it interests me or is relevant to me, come in here, read, learn, and research the matter at hand before posting my opinions
b.) decide I don't care about, and not click on the thread


And here's what I wouldn't do:

1.) Come in here and make up excuses as to how whatever is that is factually holding it back, somehow actually isn't, because I feel an immature emotional attachment to a billion dollar electronics company and feel personal insulted by this topic
2.) Post misinformation to blindly argue these statements
3.) try to shut down people even DISCUSSING the topic, because I personally either don't like it, or feel it doesn't affect me, or feel it's unlikely to change, or feel its not a big enough issue in the world to justify speaking on, etc, etc



Theres always going to be bigger issues in the world. That doesn't mean this isn't something that we can be interested in, take this needless humanitarian bullshit elsewhere rather than trying to shut down discussion on here with it, it's a blatant cop-out, the fact that you even have an account on a video game website means you are also interested about a whole shit that is meaningless in the broader picture. Nobody is saying this is life and death. Nobody is even saying it's an "issue". Nobody is raising pitchforks at Sony. We are just saying, THIS IS HOW IT WORKS, and to people unaware, now more-so than ever, as the gap has only been growing. The only people taking it to a further extent is you, by getting emotionally invested. Nobody is asking anyone to stop playing on console, or get involved in building their own PC or some other ridiculous shit. As I said in my first post that you immediately discounted, better hardware benefits everyone, and with the announcement of the XB1X, I personally am very optimistic about the potential of big leap forward in video game graphics quality. The tech is there, we are just waiting for the hardware that consoles have been providing to people after the accessible experience, to hopefully catch up a little and get closer to that gap. Nobody expects consoles to outperform $2k gaming rigs. However as the specs of the XB1X have confirmed, it is very possible for them to get much closer to high end of the market than they have been shooting for, there has been complacency in that market and consoles weren't being as competitive hardware wise as they could be, consoles will never match the highest end PC tech available at the time that defeats the purpose, but original consoles were semi-competitive with PC's and games could be developed for PC and slightly scaled back only on console release, but when you have things like the PSPro coming out looking like a PC from 5 years ago, that's a massive time lapse technologically, and its a complacency that Microsoft has decided to capitilise on.

But even if NONE of this was the case and it was still unchangeable, set in stone, and consoles will always and forever be holding back PC games heavily - thats all fine. That doesn't change that its still a fact that is happening, it doesn't change that most people are unaware of this, and doesn't change that it's a topic we are allowed to discuss.

 

[HeroesNZ]

I don't know about anything that's being discussed but I'm gonna defend my console's honour anyway ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Seriously though this is nothing new - whoever expected a ~£300 console to be a top-end gaming machine needs to wake up. There's just hella money in consoles is all.

 

[God Confirm]

I don't know how to properly explain this, but Amnesia is incredibly campy/cheesy compared to something like Silent Hill 1. Silent Hill just felt more.. Real..

It's like there's an aura of seriousness to it that isn't there in a game like Amnesia. Kind of like The Last of Us, but obviously not quite to that level of narrative detail.

Amnesia feels like a crazy fantasy world, and that's cool, but it's not quite the same if you get what I mean.

Dark confessions - I haven't ever played any Silent Hill games

I loved Amnesia but I cant really comment on this. I love the horror genre and definitely enjoyed some those titles I listed as some releases that didn't just play around jump scares. Just some personal experiences I would recommend, because there is still good horror out there

I don't know about anything that's being discussed but I'm gonna defend my console's honour anyway ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

you, you're cheeky

 

[Tony at Home]

Linux on the desktop is never gonna happen. Just spend the $99 on Win10 and move on.

No.

 

[ChatterBox]

Man we were sooooo close with the Playable Trailer and Silent Hills.. And then... Haha


It's hard to think of the last time a game was legitimately that scary. But I feel like there's room to do it now, and an audience for it. You could make an Alien: Isolation/Dead Space style game that's legitimately scary, instead of just jump scares/gross-out and monsters.

I played a game at PAX east 2016 and it was a game where you were blind and you had to make noise to use echolocation to move, which attracted the monsters you are locked in a mansion with, it was SO SCARY and absolutely one of the best games ever. That was only a fifteen minute demo, can't wait to get a pc ready to play it. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/perceptiongame/perception-3

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I played a game at PAX east 2016 and it was a game where you were blind and you had to make noise to use echolocation to move, which attracted the monsters you are locked in a mansion with, it was SO SCARY and absolutely one of the best games ever. That was only a fifteen minute demo, can't wait to get a pc ready to play it. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/perceptiongame/perception-3

Oh yeah! I completely forgot about that game -- that looks awesome

 

[Temetias]

Get as PS4 Pro and a Macbook. You'll be happier. PC's are just fucking money pits, and anyone who says otherwise is a communist fudge-toucher.

>Complains about "money pits"
>Proceeds to suggest a f**king macbook

Wtf seriously? xD PC's arent moneypits. A good pc will last for multiple console generations with minimal upgrading. And you also save money just with games being so cheap on steam.

But don't get me started on Apple products, ugh... They're so unbeliveably bad specs/prize balance.

E: also I have zero idea how this all relates to communism lol. But I can assure you I hate them as much as you do. xD

 

[LaidbackOne]

Maybe. There is an argument there that if console players were on PC, their PC wouldn't able to run such games. However scaleable graphics make that much less of an impact, at the bare minimum you would be able to see vast improvements at the quality of games released today played at max settings.


If you feel a graphics card released 4 years ago is more than fine to run anything available on todays gaming market at full graphics, this just supports the statement that todays video games are being designed to use tech from 5 years ago, not tech from today.



Well, we are talking about the two games I was most excited for from E3, so I'm not even going to put them against each other. Possibly even more excited for Spider-Man since we've already got 2 incredible / borderline flawless games with the Metro series, but haven't seen a good Spidey in a long time. My point was however, Metro is looking alot better graphically, that game looks absolutely stunning, and was definitely the most incredible thing I saw there.

I'm sure metro was not 100% gameplay tho.

 

[God Confirm]

I'm sure metro was not 100% gameplay tho.

first ones played like that too. I think it is.

 

[Jynks]

lol.. PCs are more powerful than consoles.. wow, what a shocking development!! How could anyone have ever expect that to be true?!!

You know what else is true.. a Console is like a fraction of the cost. Expecting them to have the same performance at those cost differences is just stupidity.

You know what else it true, consoles are "set" hardware, so when you buy a game it plays and plays well. On PC you spend 2 grand on your computer and then the games you run in 6 moths no longer have top frame rates.

 

[God Confirm]

lol.. PCs are more powerful than consoles.. wow, what a shocking development!! How could anyone have ever expect that to be true?!!

You know what else is true.. a Console is like a fraction of the cost. Expecting them to have the same performance at those cost differences is just stupidity.

You know what else it true, consoles are "set" hardware, so when you buy a game it plays and plays well. On PC you spend 2 grand on your computer and then the games you run in 6 moths no longer have top frame rates.

you know what else is true, reading comprehension is very hard

 

[LaidbackOne]

first ones played like that too. I think it is.

You mean it animated like in this scripted presentation? U see a magazine on the floor, pick it up and put it straight into the gun? Each and every animation was seemless and realistic?
Well I hope it really looks like this but i just don't see it. Judging a game's looks by its E3 presentation seems naive.

 

[ExpectFlames]

What game am I flying out to buy a Pc over is the question?

 

[God Confirm]

You mean it animated like in this scripted presentation? U see a magazine on the floor, pick it up and put it straight into the gun? Each and every animation was seemless and realistic?
Well I hope it really looks like this but i just don't see it. Judging a game's looks by its E3 presentation seems naive.

This was a showroom sequence but it was all gameplay. Best believe that entire sequence will be in the game, and playable. There will be many more the same. They will jam in as many animations like this as they can. Play Metro 2033 then Last Light and look at the advancement there alone.

 

[Jynks]

you know what else is true, reading comprehension is very hard

Oh, sorry, I'll try and make it a little clearer.. All I am saying is that consoles will never be as powerful as pc.. but they are so much cheaper.. and that is why they drive the industry.

So a developer of AAA games saying they are holding them back, is actually forgetting hat he would most likely not BE making those games without the "shot comings" of the consoles. Those games exist because of console, and despite a few like witcher and blizzard.. this is the way it actually is.. holding them back? no.. it ALLOWS them to exist in business at all

It is a chicken and an egg thing, as well as reality vs la la land.