Batman: Arkham Knight Aiming for identical Res/Framerate Across Xbox One and PS4
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
TonberrysKnife
Member
Not all of them? I think you mean almost all of them.
It's gonna be interesting tomorrow to see if this "parity" is even a real thing in ACU. I know there are PS4 copies out in the wild already and the game looked great on what I saw on LfP stream yesterday, and I was wondering if any XB1 copies are already out in the wild and has been compared. Gonna be funny if there isn't actual parity
bananafactory
Banned
They won't alienate the Xbox audience, they know the PS4 is a more powerful system.
Did 360/PS3 owners last gen get miffed when a dev said the PC version is obviously the definitive experience? No.
retrogamer84
Member
Just buy it used instead. You can still get the game and protest with your wallet also.
I've always found the idea of boycotting strange, especially with the different reasons for it. I've been raised with a lot of Palestinian friends, who always boycott lots of different Israeli related products, and for a large period of time I did the same. Until one day my Uncle took me to starbucks and I refused to buy, and we had a small debate about the whole concept of boycotting.
I've just decided to not boycott anymore, and it was hard with my friends, because really, the only person you are depriving (especially if it is a great product) is yourself in the end.
But hey I'm not here to argue philosophy.
Indeed; I have a good friend from college who has worked with Rocksteady since the original Arkham games on making the PC version fantastic from the NVIDIA side. Part of the reason developers talk about "parity" is that optimization / frame rate is the last thing worked on. So until the game is a month or two (or less) away from going gold; they have no idea what their final frame rate & resolutions are going to be. It depends on how much optimization they can ring out of the engine & platform. Since so many of these games are made on PCs and then moved over to consoles - they don't have as much of a sense on end-game performance till they get close to the end.
It'll be interesting to see how this console generation goes - will developers go for more 1080p60fps games that have less powerful graphics & engines, or be willing to go 900p / 30 fps and do whizbang new graphical stuff. Most generations go the latter route; but if GAF is really representative of gamers, then you might see a much slower move towards shinier graphics to keep resolutions & framerates high.
Not this crap again.
Why are publishers and developers seemingly running scared from a console in third position and pandering to it's lower power whilst ignoring the advantages of the market leading console, which also happens to be more powerful?
Bethesda (Skyrim), Platinum (Bayonetta), 2K/Gearbox (Borderlands) all performed worse on PS3 as opposed to Xbox 360, yet there was no parity.
What is going on?
It's infuriating to hear this drivel when the gulf in power is so apparent.
Destiny, Assassin's Creed Unity, now Batman Arkham Knight - what's next?
Why are publishers and developers seemingly running scared from a console in third position and pandering to it's lower power whilst ignoring the advantages of the market leading console, which also happens to be more powerful?
Bethesda (Skyrim), Platinum (Bayonetta), 2K/Gearbox (Borderlands) all performed worse on PS3 as opposed to Xbox 360, yet there was no parity.
What is going on?
It's infuriating to hear this drivel when the gulf in power is so apparent.
Destiny, Assassin's Creed Unity, now Batman Arkham Knight - what's next?
MS can exert pressure on any multiplatform developer not just the ones they are co marketing with (see Blizzard Diablo 3's "unacceptable" 900p resolution). Here are the facts:
- Historically platform power and architecture differentials within a given generation led to different levels of performance and presentation. This has been true across literally every generation including the ones where a single weaker console (PS2) absolutely dominated the hardware superior competitor (Xbox)
- This is the first console generation wherein Microsoft has not found itself in advantageous position from a development/hardware stabdpoint over their closest competitors.
- MS has gone to great lengths to diminish consumer concerns over the factual hardware performance gap even going so far as to outright LIE to consumers prior to release of their console (see Penello's infamous "we made DirectX" post)
- Sony is currently in a position where they are providing more powerful hardware and gaining an increasingly large market share advantage over MS
- Despite the more powerful console being the market leader multiple publishers and multiplatform games are being touted as being "developed for parity" or released with non representative performance gains on the better selling more powerful console
- The only party that stands to benefit from equality of resolution, framerate, and/or effects is the console with less powerful hardware, lower marketshare and, most importantly, significant consumer image problems in part due to their lesser hardware performance.
So, given what we know, it is perfectly logical and reasonable to assume the only party who would benefit from this change in historical precedent would be the ones behind it. So you tell me, given the facts who is being unreasonable the person following the logical progression of effect---> sole benefactor ergo cause or the person calling them liars or fanatics without offering so much as a single factual argument or counterpoint to the contrary.
Furthermore, even if you disagree with that conclusion as a consumer you should still be outraged that consumers are being sold an inferior product simply because the closest competitor isn't capable of offering the same value. It's absurd.
I was referring to the Xbone/Ps4 comparison.
But even in that slide is just implied that the PC version will (for obvious reason) be the best one, which is exactly my point: These type of statements are completely worthless, because filtered through the PR machine of "make everyone happy", if you want to know if there's real "forced parity", you have to wait for the game to come out, or at least have a decent showing/preview.
Am I missing something, how was Destiny gimped on the PS4? And lol at that irrelevant point (and inaccurate) in bold.
1) boycotts can work.
2) giving in to cynicism will make you an ineffectual and boring person.
But of course, Videogame /= Palestinian situation in any way, shape, or form.
It is worth noting that this is the first console generation in a while where the two major consoles (sorry WiiU) are very, very similar in terms of CPU architecture and overall specifications. The PS2 / Xbox were built pretty differently, and the PS3 went will Cell architecture. So a lot of the "parity" arguments from previous generations are not quite as applicable; as a lot of those really depended on the skill level and comfort with the various architectures. With the PS4 / X1 basically being optimized PCs (and using many of the same parts in comparison to previous console generations) - I am curious as to how much individual developer skill will play into the performance of a given port.
Melchiah
Member
Oddly enough, they seem to be willing to risk the animosity of a larger PS4 audience when they pamper the smaller userbase.
I think the 360 owners would have been pissed off, if their version of the game had ran as bad as the PS3's. Especially if they bought the system for better multiplatforms.
Pathfinder
Member
The popular opinion is that Destiny was gimped on PS4 because it didn't look remarkably better than it did on XO.
Canis lupus
Member
They do say what they are aiming for parity in.
So yeah boycotting a gimped, an intentional gimped product is the most legit reason to boycott something.
MrChowderClams
Member
Whenever I see "parity" it's like an instant "buy it on PC" flag in my brain.
Cyborg
Member
My reaction.....WTF is going on?
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
What the hell c'mon rocksteady
THE GREY CARDINAL
Neo Member
My hat goes off to Kojima who had the balls to make his game to the strengths of each console (with PS4 getting that unique atmosphere processing effects). This pampering to the weaker console BS sucks. MS holding things back with their shitty design choices.
Gotdatmoney
Member
I read that as we are aiming for 1080p on both systems. Am I majorly misconstruing that?
>-Baron-Spamedi-<
Member
Ok. Well that means definitely no pre order from me until I find out exactly what they mean by parity.
If it means the PS4 version is hobbled to match the Xbox I'll just buy other games instead. I'm sure there will be enough devs not pandering to the lowest common denominator for it not to matter too much if I give Batman a miss this time around.
To avoid debates and stuff about buying games from developers who don't want to use the unique advantages of the PS4 I cancelled my AC:U pre order and to be quite honest I don't regret it at all. Instead I'm getting games from devs who aren't aiming for parity as I find that ethos unpalatable.
If it means the PS4 version is hobbled to match the Xbox I'll just buy other games instead. I'm sure there will be enough devs not pandering to the lowest common denominator for it not to matter too much if I give Batman a miss this time around.
To avoid debates and stuff about buying games from developers who don't want to use the unique advantages of the PS4 I cancelled my AC:U pre order and to be quite honest I don't regret it at all. Instead I'm getting games from devs who aren't aiming for parity as I find that ethos unpalatable.
I really don't want to argue with you because I really don't understand some of the points you are making and its relevance. You just listed a bunch of facts. Also your last point is so lame and short sighted. The whole "only MS can benefit" point is extremely idiotic. But I'm not going to argue that since you've made up your mind about MS being the bad guy here, and enforcing this even though you have no hard evidence. Stop treating it like a mathematical equation of "oh x+y+z = MS are evil bad mean corporation who did this".
You've just turned this argument into something else as well, it started off with you arguing Arkham Knight must have parity enforced by MS, to (after realising you are wrong since you've failed to mention that AK HAS A MARKETING PARTNERSHIP WITH SONY) you talking about why parity is bad and I should be outraged.
I never talked about parity as a whole, and no where did I argue that it's something good.
Konami's efforts on the Xbox One are not to be applauded.
Welp, guess I'm skipping Arkham Knight if this holds to be true. Probably pick it up used sub $20 or something. One console is factually more graphically competent than the other and should be treated as such. More AA, higher shadow samples, goddamn something. I don't want to keep buying just exclusive games (new) but eventually they'll show up third party games and I hope when that happens the gaming fanbase goes and gets their massive graphics boner and demands similar things from third parties.
Maybe we'll see an even larger disparity in graphics between PS4 multiplats and PS4 first party games
If U4 looks anything close to the reveal trailer (and it probably won't) then it will look half a gen or more better than all the parity multiplats
bananafactory
Banned
It's possible that by saying they are "aiming for parity" it's simply a case of trying to get both running at the highest possible standards, ie. 1080p. I don't see anywhere in the quote where they specifically talk about locking the resolution or framerate, like Ubi did.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Won't buy if true. One my friends is diehard Batman fan, but hates Xbox and cancelled AC Unity after parity(I did too). Will be interesting to see his response to this.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
If you have a PC good enough to run this better than consoles, that flag should be always on.
Hidden One
Member
No dev was talking this BS parity shit when they had an easier time deving on 360 and ps3 and almost all the multiplats on 360 looked better. Now ps4 has power and they don't want to use it. What the fuck?
Pathfinder
Member
If he's a diehard Batman fan, but will refuse to buy this game because of "parity", then that doesn't really count as being a diehard fan. It's more a fair weather fan.
BLUElightCory
Member
This is probably what they're saying - 1080/30 on both consoles. No way to know for sure.
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
A better line could be "we are going to deliver the best experience on each console " or something like that but after Unity I don't trust the word parity anymore and take it as the worst possible outcome. They won't get a day zero pre-order from me anymore and I'm just gonna wait what parity meant and if I buy this game or any future games from them for that matter.
Beer Monkey
Member
A lot of developers busted their asses last gen trying to give PS3 owners a comparable experience to the X360 experience. Often they would have to spend more time coding and optimizing for PS3 (due to segmented memory model, cell versus stronger GPU, etc...PS3 was harder to code for if you wanted to get the same results!) than they did for the 360 version because they wanted to deliver a PS3 version that looked and performed as well, or close to it. And they often did this even though they knew the PS3 version of some of these titles would sell less anyway.
They just didn't talk to the press and use the word 'parity'.
They didn't put fucking DO LOOPS in the 360 version to bring it down to the PS3 version's level of performance.
We're seeing the same thing now. Nobody is putting DO LOOPS in PS4 builds to slow down framerate. Nobody is commenting out shaders to reduce graphical effects.
Funny how everybody is losing their minds over this shit all of a sudden. New generation, new rules, I guess.
krypt0nian
Banned
Every game that does this is getting bought used.
Not one dime, devs.
Not one dime, devs.
alexandros
Banned
I'm sure many other people did the same thing, however I am not at all convinced about the effectiveness of boycotts in terms of shaping publisher behavior. I believe that positive reinforcement is much more effective in showing publishers where the audience is. I believe it's more likely that an AC or Batman boycott will end up hurting the PS4 platform since it's likely that the Xbox One or PC sales will be inflated as a result, causing the developers and publishers to focus even more on those versions.
No.
It doesn't matter what they aim for, the specs of both consoles are set in stone, if parity is an aim at any point then one version is going to fall short of its potential
If they said both versions are running at 60fps and 1080p and everything else was the same then people would still be annoyed they didn't go hell for leather on making the PS4 reach its potential