"Kayant, if you can show me an official confirmation the CPU inside the PS4 is running a faster clock go ahead otherwise just be quiet. X box 1 CPU runs faster." - Show me when I have once argued it was higher. I have always said it was 1.6Ghz and Sony have confirmed it multiple times. Oh if XB1's CPU is so much powerful and mighty why is that in games so far generally PS4 has the better framerate and the demo the press when shown the XB1 had framerate issues.
&...
"It sounds like internally as a team, they decided that 900p/30 would be the target" - Again the only public information about a initial target is 1080p/60fps - http://gamingbolt.com/assas...
The point about the uproar is the dev explicitly said they are locking both at the "same spec" to avoid debate and stuff implying one could be pushe...
Nothing really. There is no need to apologise his initial statement was pretty clear and well explained. If it wasn't it would have been corrected that same day or next day at the latest not 3 days after. When they can carefully plan their PR response.
PR going to PR. Well at least they decided to wake up now and do their job.
WTF?? Serious what is wrong with devs/pub these days. Man PC gamers truly suffer sometimes. A shame things like this are still happening.
Not in EU though Minecraft won :p
Man the launch for this game has been quite the trainwreck.
Sounds like Blu-ray Vs DVD. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.
So like AC4's implementation? http://bartwronski.com/2014...
"First off the parity clause has nothing to do with graphics." - Right because it's not like Ubisoft just gave a statement saying they are locking both at the same spec to avoid debate and stuff. No one is talking about a policy that relates to only indie devs in the first place and that is not even the clause MS has in place. It is devs must release the game on the same day as other platforms.
"The caveat in question is the launch parity clause — a request...
Sure but XB1 is having framerate issues based on previews. And if both are meant to be the same then surely PS4's CPU isn't the limiting factor here. Both CPU's are which was explained in the initial statement it is the reason they are both 30fps.
On the flip side PS4's GPU is stronger meaning it can handle better effects and higher resolution but it's limited by XB1's weaker GPU because Ubisoft want's to avoid "debate and stuff".
Ok explain why PS4 is often the one with the better framerates... either way there is a bigger gap in GPU between the two than there is CPU wise and so far XB1 CPU advantages have not shown themselves in majority of games. Even if that was the case here the CPU difference is not enough for XB1 to have 60fps and from the latest previews it has framerate issues so that advantage isn't showing at it's has issues as the PS4 version because they are said to be the "same".
...
What???
You doing this like it don't happen last gen or other gens. No one is to blame here expect Bethesda/Tango Gameworks for not doing their job by not locking FPS.
"if people saw major differences between PC and Consoles, a huge chunk would jump to PC" - Right because this hasn't existed for more than 10 years now.
"sony and MS are guilty for this, they should've make their systems a 100$ more expensive" - ...
I will await until they prove it. Until then I like how companies continue to back-track silly decision in the face of negative PR.
"Here's an explanation from 343 executive producer Dan Ayoub: “During development we were really pleased with the way the engine and buffer allowed us to switch instantly between classic and Anniversary engines that are running simultaneously – however that, as you might expect, put a hit on resolution. The campaign of Halo 2: Anniversary looked fantastic at 720p with the level of detail and clarity it gave us, but like every other aspect of the game and tech, we wanted to push it fu...
@Death
"Get a life. This one obviously isn't working very well for you." - Truly showing what it means to be a true gamer ain't you.
@AndrewLB
Lmaooo.... pretty lame attempt at trolling.
"Do you want us to do that?" he asked.
No, I said. I think, if you buy something on a disc, that you have a kind of moral contract with the person you've bought it from that you retain some of ...
Yh considering they are cpu-bound as they have explained 60fps is unlikely anyway. But higher that 900p/better or more effects is likely given the GPU differences.
This is basically how PC gamers must feel when a console port doesn't have any customisations(Graphics,contro ls, etc) to tune to their hardware.
There is reason hardware is scalability and different tiers exist in the world. Why buy a £100 headphone if a £10 does the job? I mean it's the same music. Does 30mm and 50mm make a difference? Does the music become less enjoyable because of that?
Saying the difference doesn't matter is subjective and a bit ignorant. Ubisoft here clearly said it was done to avoid "debate and stuff". Some people brought PS4 among other reasons because it's more ...
@Imalwaysright
I never said MS did it. I said it was done by ubisoft to appease them. Why? They are in a co-marketing deal with MS it's in their best interest. And that may be true but a continued can change that. Destiny, Diablo 3 change it a bit were announced to getting 1080p support.
@starchild
"Fanboy going to fanboy. Brain shut off. No logical thought possible.
This explanation makes perfect sense to anyone with a brain. " - Right because the initial require want exactly you to be a genius. Please.
"Another Ubisoft employee--a designer or director, I'm not sure--also said that the game would be 1080p/60fps, but I knew right off the bat that he was mistaken and that such a framerate and resolution would be impo...