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

[SaSSolino]

I care about substance. You'll get bored and tired of the 10/10 far more quickly than you think. And 7/10 is not ugly, what are you even saying? 7/10 is your average chick who you see and say "she's pretty hot". Nothing amazing about 7's, but nothing wrong either. Ugly is 5/10 and below. 6/10's are 7's with some kind of flaw (too fat, too skinny, too tall, too short, etc).

Also, my name comes from Juggernaut, not tits. Just an FYI.

How the fuck did you guys go from talking about consoles to talking about the 0 to 10 metric system for chicks?!

TYM is a 10/10 forum free. Wow.

ps: also 7/10 isn't ugly, wtf.

 

[Aramonde]

Sony needs something to compete with the XBox One X or games still get held back by the weakest link.

MS is the one that needs something to compete with the PS4 because the XB1 is behind in sales which is why they're releasing the XB1-X. MS isn't doing it to help the developers or to stay up with current tech. Its takes a lot of money to make and sale a new console which is something some of these developers either dont understand that or dont care about because they dont have do it.

 

[QueenOmega]

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.

Call pcs money pits. Recomends appleshit tech. Ok I'm out, this is out of control.

 

[Swindle]

Call pcs money pits. Recomends appleshit tech. Ok I'm out, this is out of control.

Sarcasm is lost on swine.

 

[Temetias]

Sarcasm is lost on swine.

Sarcasm is tough when communicating via text well played tho

 

[God Confirm]

if that was satire Swindle it was actually pretty good lol

 

[Juggs]

Just giving an example of a game that put the focus on graphics and then was quickly forgotten due to the gameplay itself being forgettable.

And that's my whole point with the "10/10 vs 7/10 analogy". Graphics will ALWAYS be a plus, but NEVER will be a reason a game is good or a reason the game has a lasting effect. At least not for actual, serious gamers. For casuals who barely plays games for more than a month, it might be important. And to refer to my analogy, these casuals are basically shallow gamers.

 

[Juggs]

How the fuck did you guys go from talking about consoles to talking about the 0 to 10 metric system for chicks?!

TYM is a 10/10 forum free. Wow.

ps: also 7/10 isn't ugly, wtf.

Idk, I used a weird analogy because since my first post I was halfway trolling. But someone legitimately responded to my analogy, saying a 7/10 was ugly. That makes less sense than anything said in this thread, so I had to put out a little explanation.

 

[God Confirm]

And that's my whole point with the "10/10 vs 7/10 analogy". Graphics will ALWAYS be a plus, but NEVER will be a reason a game is good or a reason the game has a lasting effect. At least not for actual, serious gamers. For casuals who barely plays games for more than a month, it might be important. And to refer to my analogy, these casuals are basically shallow gamers.

So why do you keep coming back to this analogy but refusing to acknowledge the fact that this topic impacted the shit out of great games, which made no expense and put gameplay + writing first? Witcher 3 is the highest user reviewed game of Metacritic on all time, and it's graphics were completely gutted by this, that game could even been even GREATER than it was. This is what holding back graphics means. That's just what can be done with today's tech, those graphics weren't holding back the gameplay at all - in fact, the opposite is true - having to develop on todays tech with today's video game engines, and then having to optimize for console's using hardware from 5 years ago puts MORE work for the developers and consumes resources that could have been used to improve gameplay even further, which has been verified by both the lead game designer for Witcher 3, the director for this game in the thread title, and many more people from inside the industry.

Practically EVERYONE prefers gameplay first before graphics - even casuals, the Order got shat on and was in the $20 bin within the month. However, one does not have to come at the expense of the other, and it doesn't stop it from being impacted by the topic at hand, you gotta put down this fallacy thats saying otherwise

 

[Juggs]

So why do you keep coming back to this analogy but refusing to acknowledge the fact that this topic impacted the shit out of great games, which made no expense and put gameplay + writing first? Witcher 3 is the highest user reviewed game of Metacritic on all time, and it's graphics were completely gutted by this, that game could even been even GREATER than it was. This is what holding back graphics means. That's just what can be done with today's tech, those graphics weren't holding back the gameplay at all - in fact, the opposite is true - having to develop on todays tech with today's video game engines, and then having to optimize for console's using hardware from 5 years ago puts MORE work for the developers and consumes resources that could have been used to improve gameplay even further, which has been verified by both the lead game designer for Witcher 3, the director for this game in the thread title, and many more people from inside the industry.

Practically EVERYONE prefers gameplay first before graphics - even casuals, the Order got shat on and was in the $20 bin within the month. However, one does not have to come at the expense of the other, and it doesn't stop it from being impacted by the topic at hand, you gotta put down this fallacy thats saying otherwise

What does developers or anyone else pointing this out accomplish? What's the purpose of saying something everyone knows and then complaining about it? Is this a plea to Sony and Microsoft to make better consoles or something?

Witcher 3 could have been even better if the devs weren't handicapped. Okay?

 

[God Confirm]

What does developers or anyone else pointing this out accomplish? What's the purpose of saying something everyone knows and then complaining about it? Is this a plea to Sony and Microsoft to make better consoles or something?

Witcher 3 could have been even better if the devs weren't handicapped. Okay?

point?

whats the point to knowing that the earth is round and not flat? We can't change it, we can still talk about it. And we can still talk about the way the gaming industry works. Most people aren't even aware of this shit.

You guys had a far too heavy emotional response to this article.

The man was asked a question during a question and he answered it truthfully and honestly. He didn't complain about it, didn't whine about it, didn't set out to accomplish anything, and made no pleas to anybody. The majority of his interview was him talking about coming up from working on a smaller indie game with his first release to now a big budget game for his second, and how passionate he is about the opportunity he has been given to do so. He covered most of what the process was for him and what it meant to him. Part of this interview was him being honest about the limitations imposed on that process as well. Read the actual interview https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/11/the-passion-behind-the-prison-break-in-a-way-out/

You've just hopped from one argument to the next trying to justify why you are upset about him saying this. Stop for a second and think about why it is this actually upsets you. What he said is factually correct, and people in here with zero developer knowledge are coming in here trying to correct him or accuse him of whining, or say that hes wrong even they they don't understand the process at all, or other immature shit, when it's none of it is the case, and it's flat out misinformation to say so. We can talk about his statements, the facts he is discussing are not common knowledge, and have big implications for the future of game design. If it doesn't interest you, then leave the thread?

 

[Scoot Magee]

So the main point here is that consoles are holding back game developers in terms of innovation, right? I see people arguing that you can still make fun games on consoles, I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

Graphics/power/specs aren't just flash. Sometimes an idea can't be fully realized due to hardware limitations. Since games are now built around consoles mostly the limited power prevents some developers from really pursuing their original idea.

I think it's definitely true. I'm sure there's many idea's that can't be realized due to the limitation of consoles.

 

[VSC_Supreme]

What does developers or anyone else pointing this out accomplish? What's the purpose of saying something everyone knows and then complaining about it? Is this a plea to Sony and Microsoft to make better consoles or something?

Witcher 3 could have been even better if the devs weren't handicapped. Okay?

I want to debate your first point but I don't know what to say on it lol, so i'll just do a bad comparison to Inj2. If Black Adam does too much damage, and everyone knows about it, what is the purpose of competitive players pointing it out? Because they would like to see a change from the people who control it.

As for your witcher 3 point

If you read the description it's not actually a "downgrade" but an "adjustment" to the engine under development at the time the game was in progress. They mentioned having a big vision in mind but they realized they were unrealistic in their ideas and changed a lot about how the engine worked, seen in the rendering, lighting, and physics. They technically were handicapped.

 

[God Confirm]

So the main point here is that consoles are holding back game developers in terms of innovation, right? I see people arguing that you can still make fun games on consoles, I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

Graphics/power/specs aren't just flash. Sometimes an idea can't be fully realized due to hardware limitations. Since games are now built around consoles mostly the limited power prevents some developers from really pursuing their original idea.

I think it's definitely true. I'm sure there's many idea's that can't be realized due to the limitation of consoles.

"It's still rare for smaller, independent studios to use motion-capture technology, though it isn't unheard of. [...] This doesn't mean the game's graphics are perfectly polished and the animations always smooth -- A Way Out is due to hit PlayStation 4, Xbox One and PC in early 2018, so developers are still tweaking its systems. But, there's only so much they can do.

"You want the honest truth? This machine is not so strong as you think," Fares says, pointing to the PS4 running his game. "This is like a five-year-old PC. If consoles were as powerful as PCs are today, you would see all different games. Most of the work developers put out there is to make them work on consoles.""

I think the statement he is making is that it is holding back potential graphics, but also that optimizing a game to be competitive with todays standards of graphics for yesterdays hardware is also consuming a lot of resources that could be dedicated to the gameplay experience.

 

[headcrusher]

You know what we need is another big console release that isn't a polished 7/10 system like the PS4Pro. We need the next 10/10 right now. Bring out the Playstation 5

 

[Juggs]

point?

whats the point to knowing that the earth is round and not flat? We can't change it, we can still talk about it. And we can still talk about the way the gaming industry works. Most people aren't even aware of this shit.

You guys had a far too heavy emotional response to this article.

The man was asked a question during a question and he answered it truthfully and honestly. He didn't complain about it, didn't whine about it, didn't set out to accomplish anything, and made no pleas to anybody. The majority of his interview was him talking about coming up from working on a smaller indie game with his first release to now a big budget game for his second, and how passionate he is about the opportunity he has been given to do so. He covered most of what the process was for him and what it meant to him. Part of this interview was him being honest about the limitations imposed on that process as well. Read the actual interview https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/11/the-passion-behind-the-prison-break-in-a-way-out/

You've just hopped from one argument to the next trying to justify why you are upset about him saying this. Stop for a second and think about why it is this actually upsets you. What he said is factually correct, and people in here with zero developer knowledge are coming in here trying to correct him or accuse him of whining, or say that hes wrong even they they don't understand the process at all, or other immature shit, when it's none of it is the case, and it's flat out misinformation to say so. We can talk about his statements, the facts he is discussing are not common knowledge, and have big implications for the future of game design. If it doesn't interest you, then leave the thread?

I do not get upset about things like this. My initial response, as I stated, was mostly a troll that people took seriously. I know that a common OS but it's true. I mean I said "looks like devs need to git gud and QQ less", lol. But then people started responding and then so did I.

Despite that, there's nothing wrong with a conversation or talking about things. Should we talk about how water is wet while we're at it? I mean you can, it's just not particularly interesting or worth talking about. This "topic" is common knowledge to almost every gamer I've known. Even a lot of casual gamers realize the differences between console and PC and the limitations it enforces.

But you're right, this doesn't really interest me as I don't see the point. So I'll peace out.

 

[Juggs]

I want to debate your first point but I don't know what to say on it lol, so i'll just do a bad comparison to Inj2. If Black Adam does too much damage, and everyone knows about it, what is the purpose of competitive players pointing it out? Because they would like to see a change from the people who control it.

As for your witcher 3 point

If you read the description it's not actually a "downgrade" but an "adjustment" to the engine under development at the time the game was in progress. They mentioned having a big vision in mind but they realized they were unrealistic in their ideas and changed a lot about how the engine worked, seen in the rendering, lighting, and physics. They technically were handicapped.

The difference is that NRS has shown that they listen to the competitive players, and investigate the grievances, and in the past have made changes if they were warranted. There's evidence that discussion has some kind of impact. Now was every change actually warranted? No, which is why I'm glad no real balance change has happened Injustice 2 yet.

I don't see how this discussion will change anything. It's suggesting that companies like Sony and Microsoft are intentionally making their consoles weaker than they could be. Even if that is the argument, and even if it is true, wouldn't the better discussion be why that is? Obviously you have to establish a truth to that argument first, but settling it on TYM seems like a waste of time to me.

So again, peace out.

 

[Icepick]

point?

whats the point to knowing that the earth is round and not flat? We can't change it, we can still talk about it. And we can still talk about the way the gaming industry works. Most people aren't even aware of this shit.

You guys had a far too heavy emotional response to this article.

The man was asked a question during a question and he answered it truthfully and honestly. He didn't complain about it, didn't whine about it, didn't set out to accomplish anything, and made no pleas to anybody. The majority of his interview was him talking about coming up from working on a smaller indie game with his first release to now a big budget game for his second, and how passionate he is about the opportunity he has been given to do so. He covered most of what the process was for him and what it meant to him. Part of this interview was him being honest about the limitations imposed on that process as well. Read the actual interview https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/11/the-passion-behind-the-prison-break-in-a-way-out/

You've just hopped from one argument to the next trying to justify why you are upset about him saying this. Stop for a second and think about why it is this actually upsets you. What he said is factually correct, and people in here with zero developer knowledge are coming in here trying to correct him or accuse him of whining, or say that hes wrong even they they don't understand the process at all, or other immature shit, when it's none of it is the case, and it's flat out misinformation to say so. We can talk about his statements, the facts he is discussing are not common knowledge, and have big implications for the future of game design. If it doesn't interest you, then leave the thread?

I understand his point but this is not something that he should mention to the media. He should understand that you always develop for the lowest common denominator. Right now, that's the PS4 and xbone. If he wants to build some crazy tech, he can start and release it at the start of the next console cycle. Unfortunately, that's a huge risk and most companies will never agree to it. They all operate on a strict budget and they don't call the shot as to when a game gets release.