• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Last of Us 2 Is Targeting the Base PS4 Model, Not the Pro

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
That was an example relating to delineated ways in which Microsoft's developers are making expressed differences in their hardware known via development divergences.

Forza Horizon 4 is a great example, a game which has huge landscapes, has AI everywhere and is extremely physics bound. They have a native 4K mode with graphical settings pushed up beyond the base system, and they have a 60 FPS mode with graphical settings more comparable to the base system.

The point is they are leveraging the compute differences in this hardware properly in ways which separate the software from the builds seen on the base system, Sony is not doing this. This isn't about 60 FPS, it's about the difference in respective builds, it's not just resolution changes.

The Last of Us 2 is just an increase in resolution on the Pro.

Where is this 31% uptick in CPU headroom being used? Where is this 24% uptick in memory bandwidth being used? Where is that missing 52% in GPU resources from the 129% uptick in compute?

Do you see what I'm talking about, it should make sense but it doesn't. They're being lazy.
The physics and AI in Forza Horizon 4 to the Last of Us are not even comparable.

It's also not like they were unable to achieve 60fps. TLOU 2 MP will likely be 60fps, the same was Uncharted 4. But we know how far they had to scale back to achieve that mark.

Also stated here that due to ND engine, it's a memory issue as to why it doesn't hit a higher resolution\other limitations.

T The 2:00 mark.
 

HeresJohnny

Member
The former is not true, a shift in focus doesn't negate the importance of software sales and they're still a huge part of their business, but now not the only focus.

They have not gone on record saying THAT, you're confusing Phil Spencer's message because I know exactly what you're talking about. He said that he doesn't need you to go out and buy an additional piece of hardware to engage their software, software which you can already access via existing hardware. Software is where the money is made, not hardware, hardware is the necessary access point but not the profit generator.

That's not the same as what you're trying to incorrectly infer.

You admitted my point but are trying to gloss over it. Hardware is the necessary access point unless you're in the rental business and you let others worry about the hardware. When the director of your division says that hardware sales are not his primary concern, he is essentially admitting that software sales aren't either, because they're linked. Hardware is software and software is hardware UNLESS you're in the rental business.
 
The physics and AI in Forza Horizon 4 to the Last of Us are not even comparable.

It's also not like they were unable to achieve 60fps. TLOU 2 MP will likely be 60fps, the same was Uncharted 4. But we know how far they had to scale back to achieve that mark.

Also stated here that due to ND engine, it's a memory issue as to why it doesn't hit a higher resolution\other limitations.

T The 2:00 mark.
Do you even understand how many physics calculations take place in a racing game and what needs to be accounted for when a full field of cars is present? It's one of the most demanding scenarios there is in physics simulations in games.

You have to account for not only the AI but also yourself in relation to environmental physics, terrain and surfaces, tire and traction, weight transfer, gravity, suspension, aerodynamic drag, torque and horsepower, rolling resistance, rotational mass etc. It's insane the amount of shit going on in real time that needs to be accounted for.

You have no Earthly idea what you're talking about.

So a deferred renderer explains things for Naughty Dog's engine? How is something like Gears 4 and Red Dead Redemption 2 then native 4K on the Xbox One X or Battlefront II which is essentially double the Pro's resolution? Those are using a deferred renderer... Sure it's got more bandwidth, but it's only 46% more and those games are operating at resolutions 100% higher to 200% higher. Can you explain that?
 

ethomaz

Banned
My question is why can't a billion dollar Publisher optimize the game for both consoles? It's a 1st party title... it should get 1st party love for both the base PS4 and Pro edition.
You will need always to give up on some features because the base hardware can't do it.

Your development needs to target the base console at feature level to after try to scale to the Pro with optimizations... but you will never put something on Pro that can't be done on base.

That is why mid-gen upgrades are useless and hold by the base hardware... we need generations breaks to have advances in gaming development.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
The physics and AI in Forza Horizon 4 to the Last of Us are not even comparable.

It's also not like they were unable to achieve 60fps. TLOU 2 MP will likely be 60fps, the same was Uncharted 4. But we know how far they had to scale back to achieve that mark.

Also stated here that due to ND engine, it's a memory issue as to why it doesn't hit a higher resolution\other limitations.

T The 2:00 mark.

There won't be a TLOU2 MP.

BTW what you said is right... racing and sports games are the least demanding in processing even on PC... there is a study about that... that is why racing games usually reaches better stable resolutions and framerates... they require less processing and optimizations to run.
 
Last edited:
What exactly does this have to do with a technical thread?

You will need always to give up on some features because the base hardware can't do it.

Your development needs to target the base console at feature level to after try to scale to the Pro with optimizations... but you will never put something on Pro that can't be done on base.

That is why mid-gen upgrades are useless and hold by the base hardware... we need generations breaks to have advances in gaming development.
That's not at all how development works, they come in hot shooting considerably beyond their target and then dial back where needed.

It's easier to tear down than it is to build up to finite constraints. I'm sure you're aware of "downgrades", and that's exactly what this is. What they initially show you is running their 'uncompressed' work and as they tune more and more certain things become sacrificed to align with the target platform.

These lower end systems don't dictate the upper bounds, anything can be reduced for operation. Geometry, textures, LoD's, draw distances, lighting, shadows, reflections, resolution, framerate etc.

Switch getting current gen ports of things like Doom Eternal is a prime example of this ethos in practice. This doesn't bode well for the bottom end platform, but that platform doesn't dictate anything at the top end.
 
Last edited:
What exactly does this have to do with a technical thread?

That's not at all how development works, they come in hot shooting considerably beyond their target and then dial back where needed.

It's easier to tear down than it is to build up to finite constraints. I'm sure you're aware of "downgrades", and that's exactly what this is. What they initially show you is running their 'uncompressed' work and as they tune more and more certain things become sacrificed to align with the target platform.

These lower end systems don't dictate the upper bounds, anything can be reduced for operation. Geometry, textures, LoD's, draw distances, lighting, shadows, reflections, resolution, framerate etc.

Switch getting current gen ports of things like Doom Eternal is a prime example of this ethos in practice. This doesn't bode well for the bottom end platform, but that platform doesn't dictate anything at the top end.
You are literally wrong.

It is NOT easier to build a stronger game and downgrade later. That is massive amounts of work that gets wasted. At most you might build a vertical slice as a demo for investors or conventions, but that is not what the actual game will have. You really think there was an actual full game somewhere that was of better quality, that a game studio never actually releases? Tell that to the PC gamers who are stuck with no improvements because their ports are done with minimal work.


Game studios are too busy as it is to afford to deliberately do work that doesn't plan to get put in the final product.
 
Last edited:

Justin9mm

Member
Every PS4 game should aim for the base and receive a Pro patch later.
What do you mean receive a Pro patch later? What is the point of owning the PS4 Pro if we don't get the benefits of being on the Pro from release? lol

4K TV's are pretty much standard in all homes now they are so cheap. There are more Pro owners than you think. If you are a serious gamer I don't understand why you would not upgrade with your TV. I bought a Pro and then sold my base PS4. Cost me something like $100-$150AUD to upgrade at the end of the day. Hardly breaking the bank.. Fuck the base PS4.
 
Last edited:
You are literally wrong.

It is NOT easier to build a stronger game and downgrade later. That is massive amounts of work that gets wasted. At most you might build a vertical slice as a demo for investors or conventions, but that is not what the actual game will have. You really think there was an actual full game somewhere that was of better quality, that a game studio never actually releases? Tell that to the PC gamers who are stuck with no improvements because their ports are done with minimal work.


Game studios are too busy as it is to afford to deliberately do work that doesn't plan to get put in the final product.
Mmmhmm


Q: Why do we need a separate piece of hardware for game development?

A: That's a good question Larry, one of the pieces of feedback we've heard from our partners is that many of them like to come in at a higher spec than what the retail kits would be. It was important to provide additional headroom for the developers so they can come in higher and tune lower as they got closer to shipping their game.

Kevin Gammill - Xbox hardware engineering team

This is literally the case for game development, that is why all devkits are more powerful than their retail counterparts.

Geometry, textures, LoD's, draw distances, lighting, shadows, reflections, resolution, framerate etc, all of these things are malleable and when created are not designed around the confines of the retail hardware. They build higher and tune things down that need it as development progresses for smooth operation on the system. They keep in what they can and dispose of or reduce what they cannot, this isn't new information, this is simply how development works.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean receive a Pro patch later? What is the point of owning the PS4 Pro if we don't get the benefits of being on the Pro from release? lol

4K TV's are pretty much standard in all homes now they are so cheap. There are more Pro owners than you think. If you are a serious gamer I don't understand why you would not upgrade with your TV. I bought a Pro and then sold my base PS4. Cost me something like $100-$150AUD to upgrade at the end of the day. Hardly breaking the bank.. Fuck the base PS4.
The literal "my world is limited to my rich country fences".

Laughing at you now bro. I'm a pro owner but yes every game should aim first for the base and be optimized for the pro. US$ 150 means more than you think worldwide.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Mmmhmm


Q: Why do we need a separate piece of hardware for game development?

A: That's a good question Larry, one of the pieces of feedback we've heard from our partners is that many of them like to come in at a higher spec than what the retail kits would be. It was important to provide additional headroom for the developers so they can come in higher and tune lower as they got closer to shipping their game.

Kevin Gammill - Xbox hardware engineering team

This is literally the case for game development, that is why all devkits are more powerful than their retail counterparts.

Geometry, textures, LoD's, draw distances, lighting, shadows, reflections, resolution, framerate etc, all of these things are malleable and when created are not designed around the confines of the retail hardware. They build higher and tune things down that need it as development progresses for smooth operation on the system. They keep in what they can and dispose of or reduce what they cannot, this isn't new information, this is simply how development works.
Yes they work strong PC machines but all features that the game will have are limited to the base console... they can't create anything that won't run on the base console.

BTW you won't waste time developing or optimizing a few with features that won't run on base console.

The SE can be said about the PC development... if developers can develop only to RXT 2000 series you will have a way different game in graphics, features and performance but devs needs to support all the lower hardware from years ago... of course some easy features end becoming a turn on/off flag in PC without optimization... so you can turn it on RTX 2000 but not in old cards.

But that is the reality of going development... you are looked to the lower denominator... consoles actually hold the whole gaming industry to use better techs on PC.
 
Last edited:
The literal "my world is limited to my rich country fences".

Laughing at you now bro. I'm a pro owner but yes every game should aim first for the base and be optimized for the pro. US$ 150 means more than you think worldwide.
If they release the hardware and it's a supported platform it should be that way from day one, why would you advocate for second class treatment for people more willing to invest money into your ecosystem?

Yes they work strong PC machines but all features that the game will have are limited to the base console... they can't create anything that won't run on the base console.
Yes they can, and they do, because all of it is malleable, it can be configured and compressed from the peak of its creation down to being nearly unrecognizable low quality.

Forza Horizon 4 was built around the Xbox One X, not the base system. Did they just take that build and dump it on the base system? No, it wouldn't run. They did their work on X, tuned that and then dialed things back further for the base system.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
If they release the hardware and it's a supported platform it should be that way from day one, why would you advocate for second class treatment for people more willing to invest money into your ecosystem?

Yes they can, and they do, because all of it is malleable, it can be configured and compressed from the peak of its creation down to being nearly unrecognizable low quality.

Forza Horizon 4 was built around the Xbox One X, not the base system. Did they just take that build and dump it on the base system? No, it wouldn't run. They did their work on X, tuned that and then dialed things back further for the base system.
Forza Horizon 4 was build with Xbox One in mind.

There isn't any game in the market that takes advantage of Xbox One X... and it won't have any because nobody will develop exclusive to it.

That is the sad truth you will never see the fully archived potential of a mid-gen upgrade hardware because you have the base.

To need a new base to push up the development... aka new generation... and that is why all developers were mad about the potential MS two SKUs... lockhart being similar to X.
 
Last edited:
Forza Horizon 4 was build with Xbox One in mind.

There isn't any game in the market that takes advantage of Xbox One X... and it won't have any because nobody will develop exclusive to it.

That is the sad truth you will never see the fully archived potential of a mid-gen upgrade hardware because you have the base.

To need a new base to push up the development... aka new generation... and that is why all developers were mad about the potential MS two SKUs.
It doesn't have to be which is what you don't understand, all of this can be taken from its pristine beauty and absolutely gutted to run on anything. They could get Forza Horizon 4 running on Switch or a phone if they wanted to with absolutely no preconceived notion to ever do it.

To the stricken, total nonsense.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
It doesn't have to be which is what you don't understand, all of this can be taken from its pristine beauty and absolutely gutted to run on anything. They could get Forza Horizon 4 running on Switch or a phone if they wanted to with absolutely no preconceived notion to ever do it.

To the stricken, total nonsense.
They can if you do two development braches... so you have two teams to take fully advantage of two hardware... that is two expensive to the point to double your dev costs if your teams are syncronized enough... if not you can blend costs to exponential levels.

Any other way you will be limited to base hardware.

The fact is Forza Horizon 4 being developed only to Xbox One X could Bea way different game in all senses including graphics.

You show FH4 being ported to Switch mobile... that is a new development branch so you can modify everything to fit the weaker hardware to the point that it is a different game inside the code.
 
Last edited:
They can if you do two development braches... so you have two teams to take fully advantage of two hardware.

Any other way you will be limited to base hardware.
Just no, how can I reiterate this to make it more simply presented than it already is. A game could be built from the ground up for the Xbox One X never even considering something lesser and it could still be run on something lesser.

Geometry complexity can be reduced, polygon counts lowered, textures compressed, reflections simplified, shadows sharpened, assets removed, LoD's and drawn distances culled, resolution can be lowered, framerates can be reduced, reconstruction can be introduced.

They have all of the abilities at their disposal to do this with any piece of 3D rendering and get it running on lesser hardware.

Crysis is the most brilliant example of all, a technological marvel, one of the most visually impressive and hardest games to run ever created solely for the PC in 2007, but they got in running on the Xbox 360 of all things with a 240 Gigaflop GPU and 512mb's of RAM.

You're wrong, 100% factually wrong. Games are malleable, they can be scaled, they don't have to consider anything else when being created but can still run on other things even if dramatically less powerful.
 
Last edited:

Justin9mm

Member
The literal "my world is limited to my rich country fences".

Laughing at you now bro. I'm a pro owner but yes every game should aim first for the base and be optimized for the pro. US$ 150 means more than you think worldwide.
Never said every game shouldn't be aimed for base PS4 first.. I only responded to the comment saying a Pro should receive a patch later which is silly.

I said $100-$150 AUD which is like $65-$100 USD.. If someone owns a PS4 and is buying games for it then if they really wanted to upgrade they could probably afford it.

I don't care that you're laughing at me 'bro'. I can say what I want, what are you gonna do about it? Nothing! LOL
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Just no, how can I reiterate this to make it more simply presented than it already is. A game could be built from the ground up for the Xbox One X never even considering something lesser and it could still be run on something lesser.

Geometry complexity can be reduced, polygon counts lowered, textures compressed, reflections simplified, shadows sharpened, assets removed, LoD's and drawn distances culled, resolution can be lowered, framerates can be reduced, reconstruction can be introduced.

They have all of the abilities at their disposal to do this with any piece of 3D rendering and get it running on lesser hardware.

Crysis is the most brilliant example of all, a technological marvel, one of the most visually impressive and hardest games to run ever created solely for the PC in 2007, but they got in running on the Xbox 360 of all things with a 240 Gigaflop GPU and 512mb's of RAM.

You're wrong, 100% factually wrong. Games are malleable, they can be scaled, they don't have to consider anything else when being created but can still run on other things even if dramatically less powerful.
You example just shows I'm right.

Crysis for 360 is a port, a new branch, that took 3 years to be done... it is basically a new gaming development targeting consoles.

I work with software development since 2004... that is how it works.
No developer will ever work like you say because nobody can bite the costs.

More escalable = less optimized and targeted a specific platform.
More exclusive targeted a hardware = less scalable.

These are two differents paths.

Ports (new brancas) can be fully changed to run in the new platform so you are not scaling it but changing it to run in another hardware.

There is no magic in game development... everything cost money.
A game will never take fully advantage of a hardware if it is not specific targeted that hardware.

Xbox One X and Pro will never show it's fully hardware potential while the bases consoles will always be closer to reach it's fully hardware potential towards the end of generation because they are the base target.
 
Last edited:
You example just shows I'm right.

Crysis for 360 is a port, a new branch, that took 3 years to be done... it is basically a new gaming development targeting consoles.

I work with software development since 2004... that is how it works.

No developer will ever work like you say because nobody can bite the costs.
First off don't throw a bogus appeal to authority at me especially when it's anecdotal and using yourself as the reference. Secondly it's a port of something designed around top end PC's and was arguably the best looking game created until 2013.

Crysis definitively proves you wrong, they took this game with absolutely no ideological setup for anything else, the most demanding piece of software in existence and four years later got it to run on a console created 2 years before it was even released with specs unimaginably low.

That is exactly what can be done in game development, they don't need a roadmap for less, they don't need to factor in something less. Every part of the rendering pipeline can be adjusted down to fit the hardware it's being paired with.

Games can be tuned so low they can end up looking like this even from the end user, developers have even more freedom.

You don't have a leg to stand on, you're wrong. This conversation is over.

1526793259127637990.jpg
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
First off don't throw a bogus appeal to authority at me especially when it's anecdotal and using yourself as the reference. Secondly it's a port of something designed around top end PC's and was arguably the best looking game created until 2013.

Crysis definitively proves you wrong, they took this game with absolutely no ideological setup for anything else, the most demanding piece of software in existence and four years later got it to run on a console created 2 years before it was even released with specs unimaginably low.

That is exactly what can be done in game development, they don't need a roadmap for less, they don't need to factor in something less. Every part of the rendering pipeline can be adjusted down to fit the hardware it's being paired with.

Games can be tuned so low they can end up looking like this even from the end user, developers have even more freedom.

1526793259127637990.jpg
Nope.

You have no ideia of what you are talking about.

Crysis was first and foremost targeted a specific subset of PCs at time to the point that Crytek even dropped old hardware support and did not make any working optimization to lower denominator hardware.

But even so it was limited by PC open nature... if they choose only a single set of CPU and GPU to target the he could be better in graphics and with better performance.

That is the point.
Even Crysis were hold by lower hardware because they couldn't focus only the top machine setup in the market.

The game ported to consoles 3 years late was not even the same game that was created for PC in 2007... it was a port where you do changes to specific make the game run in other hardware... that is why it took so many years.

Crysis is a clearly example of how game development works and how the scale marketing didn't work like you dream... the fact the unique target a single setup will always give you the best result of that unique hardware setup.

Said that the open nature of PC makes it the most unoptimized platform in the market with one key advantage that you can break unoptizations via brute force.

Specific hardware development will always give the best in everything including resources use, optimizations and features set... that is why PC, Xbox One X and PS4 Pro will always be subutilized machines.

Today base consoles hold a whole industry of gaming development.

You will see a substantial jump with the new base consoles for next-gen and even PC will see a big jump.
 
Last edited:

rəddəM

Member
All I know is that the game is going to be exactly the same on PS4 Pro as it is on basic PS4 besides the res upgrade to 1440p and more stable 30 fps.
The same as TLoUR, Uncharted 4 and The Lost Legacy's SP and MP.
The same game, only more stable and crisp for your 4K TV.
 

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
Do you even understand how many physics calculations take place in a racing game and what needs to be accounted for when a full field of cars is present? It's one of the most demanding scenarios there is in physics simulations in games.

You have to account for not only the AI but also yourself in relation to environmental physics, terrain and surfaces, tire and traction, weight transfer, gravity, suspension, aerodynamic drag, torque and horsepower, rolling resistance, rotational mass etc. It's insane the amount of shit going on in real time that needs to be accounted for.

You have no Earthly idea what you're talking about.

So a deferred renderer explains things for Naughty Dog's engine? How is something like Gears 4 and Red Dead Redemption 2 then native 4K on the Xbox One X or Battlefront II which is essentially double the Pro's resolution? Those are using a deferred renderer... Sure it's got more bandwidth, but it's only 46% more and those games are operating at resolutions 100% higher to 200% higher. Can you explain that?

I do, but clearly don't.

Last of US has a motion matching physics.

"It's this totally new way of doing traversal. I think, as you play the game, you must have noticed just how fluid the player feels. With every foot plant, every turn, there's as little blending as possible. That's applied to our NPCs. That's applied to the horses. That's applied to the dogs. We even have these dogs and horses and mocap suits running around getting the data that we needed for this really intricate system," Newman continues.

Take a look at this video, starting at 14:00


So all these additional parts in the game itself are all adding that CPU computation, so if you're sitting there, saying, "Why isn't this 60fps, even though I've gone over all the visual quality and one more area I'll touch in a moment compared to the original Last of Us. The amount of simulation, AI pathfinding, the dog sniffing finding you out, all that hunting and the conversational pieces, which was a very big part of the original last of us.....but here the elements they've added to the title overall in the engine what they're adding every single frame means that 30fps is the best you could possibly imagine on the hardware is being delivered on

In the same video, it talks about the foliage at 16:20

"Geometric grass and objects that collide with you better. They move out of your way. And all of this again has been an enhancement the views in uncharted series and they've pushed it even further here because it's a core element with the new prone contact you can crawl through the grass and stay out of view......where as the older version it does show its size....and the collision detection is very limited.... ...... but there's a very limited amount of interaction in the old game. Even though it ran like this on the PS3... running at 60fps and pushing that back down to 30 means you get a lot more interaction and objects reacting to you and the denser foliage across the board

There's a reason why games racers generally hit 60fps easier.

Uncharted MP runs at 60fps, but when you're playing survival, the game drops down to 30fps.

But Horizon runs at 1080p at 60fps, which tells that the frame-rate is triggered by big drop in resolution. It makes it easier to run at 60fps when you're rending at a quarter of the resolution of the 4K output.

The AI in FH also has rubberbanding, which means all those stats are not very accurate because their speed is determined by how far you are from your AI.
 

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
There won't be a TLOU2 MP.

BTW what you said is right... racing and sports games are the least demanding in processing even on PC... there is a study about that... that is why racing games usually reaches better stable resolutions and framerates... they require less processing and optimizations to run.

Yeah, I think it will be a MP based on the world of the Last of Us.

Stand alone game means they can continue the MP after the main series is over.
 
Never said every game shouldn't be aimed for base PS4 first.. I only responded to the comment saying a Pro should receive a patch later which is silly.

I said $100-$150 AUD which is like $65-$100 USD.. If someone owns a PS4 and is buying games for it then if they really wanted to upgrade they could probably afford it.

I don't care that you're laughing at me 'bro'. I can say what I want, what are you gonna do about it? Nothing! LOL
Nothing. Just continue laughing.
 


You will probably get a new game not part of TLOU2 in the future... if it is in the universe of TLOU nobody knows but seems like they will make it a new IP.

TLOU2 MP will be a standalone F2P MP experience, just like Fortnite/Apex. Bookmark this post.

It's highly unlikely we're talking about something totally different (such as Uncharted 5 MP), although I wouldn't mind that either TBH. :)
 

H4ze

Member
I am a base PS4 user and I am happy about that news. :D

Never bothered with an upgrade, since the PC is my main platform and I know some of you will hate me for that, but I think TLOU 1 was midrange trash.. but I am honstely looking forward to TLOU II, it just looks so so good, can't denie that.

I think this and Death Stranding will be the last two games I will buy for the ps4 until I get my hands on a ps5.
 
Have you ever started a Naughtydog game multiplayer title up, they have more P2W and cosmetics thrown in then Activision and EA. They'll charge again for this, you watch.
Dude, you're talking to someone who played UC3 MP a lot, all the way to the F2P release:


And yes, I had bought 3 stat stats ($0.49 a pop). Totally worth it for 2200 hours of gameplay.

Now you have to pay $20 for a skin in Apex Legends. TBH, I don't mind it, since it's purely cosmetic.
 

Dibils2k

Member
unfortunately Pro is very underwhelming anyway... all they will do is get 1080p/30fps on base PS4 then make the Pro version 1440p (which looks barely better on a 4k TV)
 

LordOfChaos

Member
My fear with the .5 generation consoles was that we wouldn't see everything possible squeezed out of the base boxes like in past generations. I'm glad that hasn't borne out, at least not for a big title like this. Pro/X should be a bonus, base boxes shouldn't suffer.
 
It only makes sense for every developer, be it first party of third party to optimize the heck out of the base consoles. Base PS4's install base would beat the Pro by 80-20% won't you say? Sony's first party studios have particularly done a stellar job with the way their games performed on base hardware. I've played God of War, HZD and Uncharted 4 and been pleasantly surprised at how insanely well it looked and ran on OG PS4.
 
Mid-gen upgrades are underwhelming... they are born already limited by base hardware.
Don't relate the Pro having underwhelming showings relative to the base system to the X as if they somehow share that.

We were talking about Horizon 4 before so let's continue that.

Better and/or only on the X beyond just resolution

B = Better than / O = Only on

  • (B) World lighting
  • (B) Ambient lighting (objects passing reflected light onto other objects)
  • (O) Starburst lensflares
  • (B) Shadow quality
  • (O) Dynamic shadow casting
  • (B) Reflections
  • (B) Motion blur rendering
  • (B) World LoD
  • (B) Car LoD
  • (B) Draw distance
  • (B) Foliage density
  • (B) Textures
  • (B) Texture blend shading (where surfaces merge)
  • (B) Crowd density
  • (O) Ambient occlusion

If you applied these details to the base system it would collapse the build, it would buckle the framerate to single digits and in all likelihood crash. Even the 1080p 60 FPS mode on the X is graphically a step above the base systems settings.

In absolutely no way is the base system in any way limiting. I don't know how many different ways it needs to be explained to you guys that developers are by no means limited by these weaker base consoles. The work they do on the more powerful ones can/is taken and scaled back for operation on the base. Forza Horizon 4 is by a considerable margin the best looking racing game in existence (where applicable X/PC), so to say something like it would look better if the base system wasn't factored into development is totally asinine. The fact that they even hit certain limitations and there's a higher ceiling for some things only reserved for the higher level PC's also dispels this notion as total nonsense as if they could push harder on the X.

The hardware is tapped out, your ethos is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Don't relate the Pro having underwhelming showings relative to the base system to the X as if they somehow share that.

We were talking about Horizon 4 before so let's continue that.

Better and/or only on the X beyond just resolution

B = Better than / O = Only on

  • (B) World lighting
  • (B) Ambient lighting (objects passing reflected light onto other objects)
  • (O) Starburst lensflares
  • (B) Shadow quality
  • (O) Dynamic shadow casting
  • (B) Reflections
  • (B) Motion blur rendering
  • (B) World LoD
  • (B) Car LoD
  • (B) Draw distance
  • (B) Foliage density
  • (B) Textures
  • (B) Texture blend shading (where surfaces merge)
  • (B) Crowd density
  • (O) Ambient occlusion

If you applied these details to the base system it would collapse the build, it would buckle the framerate to single digits and in all likelihood crash. Even the 1080p 60 FPS mode on the X is graphically a step above the base systems settings.

In absolutely no way is the base system in any way limiting. I don't know how many different ways it needs to be explained to you guys that developers are by no means limited by these weaker base consoles. The work they do on the more powerful ones can/is taken and scaled back for operation on the base. Forza Horizon 4 is by a considerable margin the best looking racing game in existence (where applicable X/PC), so to say something like it would look better if the base system wasn't factored into development is totally asinine. The fact that they even hit certain limitations and there's a higher ceiling for some things only reserved for the higher level PC's also dispels this notion as total nonsense as if they could push harder on the X.

The hardware is tapped out, your ethos is ridiculous.
There is no game that takes full advantage of Xbox One X and it will never exists because it is limited by base hardware.

Forza Horizon 4 could have be way better if not limited by Xbox One... in fact even on PC it is hold by console hardware.

That is the sad truth about mid-gen upgrades and the PC gaming industry development... well it is not even about games on PC software development is hold by the x86 legacy but PC could hide these limitation with brute force... consoles can't.

Anybody that works in software development are pretty concient about that... it is weird you to fight against the truth
 
Last edited:

GrayFoxPL

Member
Good! Very good! I applaud ND.

z9MFecl.gif


Too many developers treat base PS4 owners like shit with their poor PS4 optimization and "but it runs well on pro" shit.

Base PS4 is what most ppl have.
 
There is no game that takes full advantage of Xbox One X and it will never exists because it is limited by base hardware.

Forza Horizon 4 could have be way better if not limited by Xbox One... in fact even on PC it is hold by console hardware.

That is the sad truth about mid-gen upgrades and the PC gaming industry development... well it is not even about games on PC software development is hold by the x86 legacy but PC could hide these limitation with brute force... consoles can't.

Anybody that works in software development are pretty concient about that... it is weird you to fight against the truth
It's not even a contentious point anymore, you're just wrong.
 

ethomaz

Banned
It's not even a contentious point anymore, you're just wrong.
Accept the truth.
You have no ideia what are you talking about.

Please ask somebody with experience before try to say others are wrong.

Xbox One X is a hardware with wasted potential that will never be used... that is the sad truth about mid-gen upgrades.
 
Last edited:
Accept the truth.
You have no ideia what are you talking about.
You haven't even presented a counterpoint, that situation presents itself when you're wrong, buddy.

Don't relate the Pro having underwhelming showings relative to the base system to the X as if they somehow share that.

We were talking about Horizon 4 before so let's continue that.

Better and/or only on the X beyond just resolution

B = Better than / O = Only on

  • (B) World lighting
  • (B) Ambient lighting (objects passing reflected light onto other objects)
  • (O) Starburst lensflares
  • (B) Shadow quality
  • (O) Dynamic shadow casting
  • (B) Reflections
  • (B) Motion blur rendering
  • (B) World LoD
  • (B) Car LoD
  • (B) Draw distance
  • (B) Foliage density
  • (B) Textures
  • (B) Texture blend shading (where surfaces merge)
  • (B) Crowd density
  • (O) Ambient occlusion

If you applied these details to the base system it would collapse the build, it would buckle the framerate to single digits and in all likelihood crash. Even the 1080p 60 FPS mode on the X is graphically a step above the base systems settings.

In absolutely no way is the base system in any way limiting. I don't know how many different ways it needs to be explained to you guys that developers are by no means limited by these weaker base consoles. The work they do on the more powerful ones can/is taken and scaled back for operation on the base. Forza Horizon 4 is by a considerable margin the best looking racing game in existence (where applicable X/PC), so to say something like it would look better if the base system wasn't factored into development is totally asinine. The fact that they even hit certain limitations and there's a higher ceiling for some things only reserved for the higher level PC's also dispels this notion as total nonsense as if they could push harder on the X.

The hardware is tapped out, your ethos is ridiculous.
Here's the reality, this whole post not only definitively dispels your delusion notion of the weaker hardware limiting the stronger, it also dispel that it has more to give.

Game Over, end of the road. I don't need to say anything else, this factually and entirely ends both discussions.
 
Last edited:

LOLCats

Banned
Makes sense, a lot of casuals play these games, but not a lot of those same casuals buy the pro.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom