StrongBlackVine
Banned
Not spending your money on a gimped product isn't about sending a message. I just don't want their intentionally inferior product.
Batman: Arkham Knight Aiming for identical Res/Framerate Across Xbox One and PS4
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
Not spending your money on a gimped product isn't about sending a message. I just don't want their intentionally inferior product.
Cave Johnson
Member
The difference between those "knee-jerk" responses and the intended "parity" development principle is that one is directly impacting the quality of the game across platforms. That is a completely different subject matter altogether. Nobody is arguing about how the game itself would turn out, it doesn't matter if the game ends up having a meta-score of 100, it doesn't tackle the issue that they are deliberately providing an unfair advantage to "equalize" a weaker system.
Secondly, I don't believe Rocksteady lives in their bubble. They should know by now that the word "parity" (especially without proper context) has become a subject matter that is only serves to dump toilet water into discussion - a desperate attempt at "any-publicity-is-good-publicity" stunt.
When it comes to resolution and frame-rate, the benchmark is either 1080p/60fps or both. It would be intentionally shallow if anybody complains about the X1 meeting said features, since that would mean the PS4 would have to go higher than 1080p/60fps - standards that are not supported in current HDTV's.
However, when the standard is below the benchmark and the consoles are still meeting equivalent "specs", an anomaly is created and you can't blame us consumers for assuming the worst. While I agree Rocksteady hasn't specifically finalized their product, their irresponsible use of the word "parity" points to cause chaos in the discussion forum.
This is what we're trying to do, getting the discussion to heat up until we get clarification. There is nothing wrong to demand more concrete details before we drop down $60 for a product.
Inferior to what?
Just look at the Xbox One. Plenty of receipts.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
Well the thing about the title of this thread and the thing people are focusing on is that they completely ignore the second paragraph in the OP that does detail their situation to the best of their current ability. Basically it's not finished and they haven't even started focusing on that area yet.
But when they do, the aim is to get the versions to the same fidelity or close to it, that is what aiming for parity entails. That doesn't mean or even hint that they will intentionally hold back one version over the other, that is the narrative people want to believe though and it's their own problem for overreacting without waiting for the end result. Then the DF article will come out and these people will be like, "oh, well I guess I was wrong, but fuck them for making me think I had it figured out by the use of a single ambiguous term".
Case in point... Halo ADS thread. Super embarrassing, people overreact without all the details. There was probably done, "preorder cancelled!" In there too.
Tidus_Great
Banned
*cances preorder*
i'll make sure to buy used when it hits dirt cheap so no money goes to the developer. I can't stand developers that do this.
i'll make sure to buy used when it hits dirt cheap so no money goes to the developer. I can't stand developers that do this.
ProfessorMoran
Member
Not exactly, it also benefits other games on the platform that the owners are boycotting a particular piece of software. For example the Tomb Raider time exclusivity might drive a lot of people away from the franchise on the PS4 but even more people might pick up Uncharted 4 and a portion of the fan base might end up migrating to the Uncharted franchise. These game don't exist in a vacuum and each dollar they lose might end up going to the competition.
Pathfinder
Member
How would that entice developers to put more resources into PS4 games if people start only buying PS4 games used?
Many people would have wanted parity last gen when games like Fallout, Bayonetta, Call of Duty and quite a few other major third party games had serious issues on one platform over the other. The disparity between versions of games last gen was a big source of complaints.
I will likely buy it day one like I do every Arkham game. Even Origin was a ton of fun, despite the bugs.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Inferior to what it could/should have been IMO.
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
You don't say, how did I not work that out.That's not how it works.
You can have the same graphics settings (Shadows/lighting/reflections/etc.) across the board....and still have multiple other options that the consoles don't have.
"Graphics Parity" ≠ Resolution, framerate, or AA parity.
The only place I might complain about is if they don't have the highest texture quality available. (or a future "hi-res" pack).
You can have "graphics parity" and not have performance/IQ parity.
badboy78660
Member
Shaunboy97
Member
Stop kidding yourselves... Ya'll PS4 folks are still buying the damn game because it'll be AWESOME!! I for one will be enjoying it on Xbox One
The funny thing is that the company not going bankrupt does not dissuade buyers to make a purchase. Posturing is silly - more so in a business whose objective is to sell copies.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
PS4 version will still have way more sales regardless of what an insignificant number of people do so it won't have a negative affect on future games.
>-Baron-Spamedi-<
Member
The public relations side was one side of the boycott coin and the pre order numbers being low leading up to launch was the other side.
The outrage was the vocalisation of the boycott and the low pre order numbers would have been the physical manifestation of the boycott.
It won't work the same for software because many people don't feel as strongly about this. However if the publisher sees a significant dip in expected sales and feels they can attribute it to this issue then they will definitely take notice in future.
Good. I was planning getting this on pc anyway.
No idea. Seemed pretty easy.
I figure we're not doing sarcastic trolling anymore.
Where's Miles at?
I guess that's true. The word boycott doesn't actually imply some formal consumer activism like in the NoDRM hashtag campaign. Message boards and comments sections all over the net being plastered in 'lol boned' or whatever is a form of boycott. I would say what I meant was a #NoParity wouldn't work. It's not something enough people would be angered about to gain enough momentum to force a policy change at the publisher level.
MS didn't have a choice, they either flipped or Xbox died. Parity is never going to have that kind of impact.
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
StrongBlackVine
Banned
I bailed out on Watch Dogs and AC Unity. Granted Rocksteady has a much better rep, but if it looks like forced parity when all the info comes releases I won't buy it(not until it's dirt cheap at least).
Pathfinder
Member
That's a fair point, but I was speaking in terms of multiplatform games.
Lots of people here are demanding PS4 multiplats be noticeably superior to the Xbox One versions, but some of these same people aren't willing to show the developer any kind of support. Buying used, or boycotting entirely, is thrown around a lot in parity threads like these. Which is fair enough, people have the right to vote with their wallet.
But where's the incentive for said developers to move past the "parity" stance? It's a dual-edged sword.
Because the gap is bigger this gen. Making more headlines too.
Ah you again, the one with the avatar which induces nightmares hahaha
Anyways, that wasn't really a boycott since the Xb1 wasn't out, it was more a vocal tsunami, caused a massive PR nightmare.
IndoAssassin
Banned
Omfg not this again, what reputation? Was I under a rock or something when MS decided to throw bags of money at companies to undermine their competitors or something?
Where did MS pay another game to gimp the PS4's graphics? WHAT IS THIS REPUTATION PEOPLE :S Show me the proof of this, if it's so obvious SHOW ME THE RECEIPTS!!
(first time I used this gif so sorry if used it in the wrong context).
Nah not gonna bother. You can prove it to yourself their history of all the successful and failed anti-competitive buyout attempts MS has tried in the past, if you actually care to since it's just a google search away.
Either way it doesn't prove that they moneyhatted parity, but there will always be that perception, because that is how MS operates by buying out their competition.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Ive been musing on this for a while, but I haven't said this before because its hard to word without sounding like a console warrior.
here it goes.
Regardless of sales, power or even gamer reception, there seems to be a vested interest in the gaming industry by large for Microsoft to do well. Im not saying this is at the expense of Sony, but there seems to be a undercurrent effort to make sure that the Xbox one doesn't fall too behind the PS4.
It could simply because two healthy platforms mean more growth in sales, or people just rooting for the underdog, or Microsoft having better relations than Sony.
Whatever it is, it seems that there are sections of journalists, publishers, market analysts and even a few developers that seem to be going the extra mile for Microsoft.
Now that is not to say that there is anything wrong with microsoft having marketing deals, advertising deals, purchasing 3rd party content and making it exclusive. Its the nature of the business after all. Im not even saying Microsoft is having a direct hand in this most of the time.
Im just saying that sometimes i get the impression that Microsoft is being kept in the race, not just by the strength of their product and ecosystem.
here it goes.
Regardless of sales, power or even gamer reception, there seems to be a vested interest in the gaming industry by large for Microsoft to do well. Im not saying this is at the expense of Sony, but there seems to be a undercurrent effort to make sure that the Xbox one doesn't fall too behind the PS4.
It could simply because two healthy platforms mean more growth in sales, or people just rooting for the underdog, or Microsoft having better relations than Sony.
Whatever it is, it seems that there are sections of journalists, publishers, market analysts and even a few developers that seem to be going the extra mile for Microsoft.
Now that is not to say that there is anything wrong with microsoft having marketing deals, advertising deals, purchasing 3rd party content and making it exclusive. Its the nature of the business after all. Im not even saying Microsoft is having a direct hand in this most of the time.
Im just saying that sometimes i get the impression that Microsoft is being kept in the race, not just by the strength of their product and ecosystem.
alexandros
Banned
Absolutely, but in that case there was a transfer of sales from one company (Microsoft) to another (Sony). In a game's case it's the same company evaluating sales on different platforms. Boycotting a specific version will skew results in such a way between sales of the same game on multiple platforms that the end message will be distorted to mean something entirely different.
But it wasn't just vocalized. Of course if you want to argue that inaction isn't a form of boycott then not buying something (or in the case of Xbone: pre-ordering) then there is no precedent because I doubt anyone goes on the street to protest platform parity on unequal platforms.Ah you again, the one with the avatar which induces nightmares hahaha
Anyways, that wasn't really a boycott since the Xb1 wasn't out, it was more a vocal tsunami, caused a massive PR nightmare.
What's the argument that the multiple platform results only start skewing past that hypothetical boycott and not right now, based on the already publicly (and not so publicly) available sales data?
Ah you again, the one with the avatar which induces nightmares hahaha
Anyways, that wasn't really a boycott since the Xb1 wasn't out, it was more a vocal tsunami, caused a massive PR nightmare.
It's the exact same thing, no way to spin it but it's ok that you tried.
Thats my point, the hypocrisy of it all.
Last gen some games ran like shit on PS3 compared to their 360 counter parts and some devs even handed off their entire project to another team (I'm looking at you Valve) simply because they couldn't be bothered with the PS3's complicated architecture or whatever excuse the had. That was a little different than this gen, since Sony's 1st party proved that a PS3 game can look and perform as good as any 360 game can.
Here we have a situation of devs saying "Eh, lets make 'em both run the same even though one console is more powerful i.e should sport the superior PQ".
Imagine the backlash last gen if 360 games were coded to the lowest common dominator (PS3) just to not upset the Playstation crowd and avoid "fanboy debate"........
I literally copied and pasted that in bold, googled it and found nothing relevant to what you said. Also are we talking about MS as a whole or XB1? Are you talking about stuff like Tomb Raider? That has no relevance...
Please if you obviously have access to some intel which I do not have, feel free to share with me the evidence of MS paying devs to gimp PS4 versions.
TheStruggler
Report me for trolling ND/TLoU2 threads
Ah you again, the one with the avatar which induces nightmares hahaha
Anyways, that wasn't really a boycott since the Xb1 wasn't out, it was more a vocal tsunami, caused a massive PR nightmare.
Boycott: "a punitive ban that forbids relations with certain groups, cooperation with a policy, or the handling of goods."
it was a boycott by the people because they saw preorders low and then the press also had a field day with it, meaning they had to change their policies cus they were shit scared
I just have no idea why anyone would publicly say this. It's purely bad PR that only serves to piss off owners of the console with the larger user base. Saying nothing and shipping with a 1080/900 split would be completely uncontroversial instead of saying that they're aiming for parity.
They may fear the political fallout from Microsoft more.
Also, I don't think it's TOO bad if it's parity at 1080p/30fps (nevermind 60 fps, but a high end open world game's not going to be 60.) The real problem is when there's obvious room for growth that should be easy to use but is pointedly avoided in the sake of not offending the weaker platform's owners (corporate or consumer), ignoring this aggravates people who bought stronger harder explicitly because they want their fucking games to look better.
Though people downplaying that admittedly are far more aggravating on the PC front as it's not like you actually spent more to get a PS4 over an XB1 except in maybe argued value costs such as with bundles.
Kojirospath
Member
Great, good reason not to buy it. Yay, I save money!
Irrelevant maybe because the console in 2nd (not 100% sure about that but okay) DOESN'T HAVE THOSE GAME AVAILABLE WHICH YOU'VE MENTIONED but okay
You stating the whole console in 3rd was just you wanting to throw a jab at Xb1 more than anything.
Do you understand that it is factually correct that Xbox One is currently in third place?
That will obviously change as it passes Wii U, but I do not appreciate you accusing me that I was ''wanting to throw a jab at Xb1'' simply because I was stating a fact.
Being passive aggressive because you cannot deal with a fact is your problem, so as the great Adam Orth once said, ''Deal With It''.
Pathfinder
Member
Seeing as how Xbox 360 and PS3 had radically different architectures, it wouldn't have made any logical sense for 360 games to be coded to lowest common denominator, because there simply wasn't one.
This gen both platforms are very similar, so it makes more sense for a developer to set a baseline that both consoles would be able to accomplish. Keeps cost and development time to a minimum so the product hits the market faster.
alexandros
Banned
I didn't quite understand, would you mind explaining?
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
I would say right not it is not factually correct that Xbox One is currently in third place. Right now there is quite a lot of uncertainty.
3 Months ago I would have agreed with you, but the latest Microsoft and Nintendo quarterly fiscal reports makes it possible that either one has more consoles sold to customers.
Why would the result of a potential boycott matter (skewing sales results in favor of Xbone) if the already skewed results in favor of PS4 for multiplatform releases isn't having any effect.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
How so? EA/Bioware, Besthesda, Activison and even Warner Bros all have recently or will ship games soon that are superior on PS4.
Tidus_Great
Banned
nope...
be too busy with bloodborne. Batman games are not day 1 purchases like FF, and MGS are to me. I can easily wait a year or more until it comes down to dirt cheap used prices.
CambriaRising
Member
As long as that parity is 1080p/30fps I'm fine.
Beer Monkey
Member
Yeah, because if the PS4 version isn't a major graphical upgrade, the game is obviously shit.
* Diablo III and Destiny excluded