Support NeoGAF

[Three]

Can't believe anyone would argue this. Set a target or two and stick to it, like 30 and 60fps, then provide a few extra options for those that want it.

The argument seems to be that of older BC games on new consoles. It seems to be about shoehorning an option that doesn't play well in case of a new gen in future that plays it acceptably. Not sure that is a great option. It is far better to have a "boost mode" built into the console like we have already and just have an unlocked framerate mode with DRS.

 

[tr1p1ex]

yes, and what you said is so insanely stupid that I can't believe it's actually real.
it shows an extraordinary lack of understanding of how video games function...




it was an example my dude, I am not holding on to anything.
I used it as an example because we have evidence that a better option existed and wasn't given to the player for no good reason.

No it shows the opposite. That more basic shit could be done on pc back in the day that would bring the console to its knees. Nevermind a big difference in standard controls as well.

And yes you're still arguing Michael Jordan could be better if only with an apples to oranges platform comparison of a game rated higher on the console platform even otherwise we wouldn't be here.

 

[Clear]

Old software doesn't "just work" on modern PC's, try installing Retrobat for instance without downloading about 17 sets of legacy Direct X updates etc!

PC's flexibility is built on a mountain of OS bloat.

 

[StueyDuck]

Soft devs will do what they know best.

You fix the problem by flushing the weak from those who make it.

 

[kevboard]

No it shows the opposite. That more basic shit could be done on pc back in the day that would bring the console to its knees. Nevermind a big difference in standard controls as well.

this will be funny.
ok.
explain to me how having the camera mapped on the right stick on PS2 (I argued for it being added on Xbox originally, but let's go with PS2) would be a performance issue in Vice City, instead of having the first person cam be mapped to it as it was on PS2.

reminder that you can always recenter the camera on PS2, you have multiple guns with first person free aim, you can drive around with cars and always INSTANTLY snap the camera towards all 4 cardinal directions.

explain how the right stick moving the camera instead of only being able to recenter it, and go into first person to move it, would negatively affect performance.

And yes you're still arguing Michael Jordan could be better if only with an apples to oranges platform comparison otherwise we wouldn't be here.

yeah totally. again my original example was that the Xbox version came after the PC version and was a downgrade again since it didn't give you the option to have a free cam as implemented on PC.
and the Xbox was above the minimum spec of the PC version, while also having improved graphics compared to PC...

 

[Guilty_AI]

yes, and what you said is so insanely stupid that I can't believe it's actually real.
it shows an extraordinary lack of understanding of how video games function...

Camera movement could be limited by performance constraints of the console. I think the old kings field in the ps2 is a good example of this with really slow turning.

That said, i dont think that was a problem in the ps2 gta games, as even without free camera there were lots of instances where the view changed rapidly at the player's command.

 

[kevboard]

Camera movement could be limited by performance constraints of the console. I think the old kings field in the ps2 is a good example of this with really slow turning.

yes...

That said, i dont think that was a problem in the ps2 gta games, as even without free camera there were lots of instances where the view changed rapidly at the player's command.

exactly.
the driving camera can literally be insta-snapped into all 4 cardinal directions, while driving at high speeds and doing stunt jumps across the map.
also you can recenter the camera in an instant, and you can always go into first person mode to look around.

there's also helicopters in the game that can rapidly turn while flying above the city.

hence his argument shows an insane lack of understanding of how video games work.
it sounds like he thinks the very act of moving a camera with the right analogue stick is a burdon on the hardware

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

Kind of goes against the whole plug and play ideal of consoles, though. I don't even like the current quality/performace toggles you get in some games.

Developers should just pick the intended settings, I don't want to be messing with menus and checking the impact on performance in something like Smash Bros. I hate having to do that on PC, always makes me think there's some setting I might have missed that makes the game smoother or better looking.

And this is why I always tell people, if you want all these FPS, resolution and options just get a PC !!!!

The consoles are primely made to be a plug and play device at a somewhat affordable option for casual gaming.

This is also why the PS5 Pro is selling so bad because the people that want better specs will just get a PC and its too expensive for the causal player that doesn't really care about performance options enough to drop the $699.

I think PC does create a lot of FOMO because of all the options on that platform which is a good and bad thing but that's the main selling point of playing on PC compared to consoles.

 

[Hudo]

Gladly this is not a "written rule", so tales out of the ass and at least 30, 60, 120fps options are more than very welcome.

Well, then it seems we differ in our expectations of what consoles should be. That's ok.

 

[rodrigolfp]

And this is why I always tell people, if you want all these FPS, resolution and options just get a PC !!!!

The consoles are primely made to be a plug and play device at a somewhat affordable option for casual gaming.

This is also why the PS5 Pro is selling so bad because the people that want better specs will just get a PC and its too expensive for the causal player that doesn't really care about performance enough to drop the $699.

I think PC does create a lot of FOMO because of all the options on that platform which is a good and bad thing but that's the main selling point of playing on PC compared to consoles.

There are several games with fps, resolutions and others option on consoles, the last even in games of the NES era, so no, not just a PC thing.

 

[Three]

yes...




exactly.
the driving camera can literally be insta-snapped into all 4 cardinal directions, while driving at high speeds and doing stunt jumps across the map.
also you can recenter the camera in an instant, and you can always go into first person mode to look around.

there's also helicopters in the game that can rapidly turn while flying above the city.

hence his argument shows an insane lack of understanding of how video games work.
it sounds like he thinks the very act of moving a camera with the right analogue stick is a burdon on the hardware

No it doesn't. If you knew anything about GTA 3 you would know that camera movement is limited by hardware.

In GTA 3, traffic despawns due to technical limitations (PS2 memory) and can be manually triggered by cycling camera angles in a car.

This is because the memory on the PS2 could not keep what is around you loaded in memory while showing you stuff beside or behind you. So when you cycle it clears everything not in veiw from memory and spawns a new set based on the new view in that instant. Even movement speed (of camera/player) was limited in GTA3 due to DVD drive streaming speed.

 

[tr1p1ex]

this will be funny.
ok.
explain to me how having the camera mapped on the right stick on PS2 (I argued for it being added on Xbox originally, but let's go with PS2) would be a performance issue in Vice City, instead of having the first person cam be mapped to it as it was on PS2.

reminder that you can always recenter the camera on PS2, you have multiple guns with first person free aim, you can drive around with cars and always INSTANTLY snap the camera towards all 4 cardinal directions.

explain how the right stick moving the camera instead of only being able to recenter it, and go into first person to move it, would negatively affect performance.




yeah totally. again my original example was that the Xbox version came after the PC version and was a downgrade again since it didn't give you the option to have a free cam as implemented on PC.
and the Xbox was above the minimum spec of the PC version, while also having improved graphics compared to PC...

GTA3 is a 95 on metacritic on PS2. ON pc it is a 93.

IT's not even an example of a classic game that could better 'if only' in the first place according to metacritic.

So I'm not go(ing) down this dumb tech rabbit hole further other to more or less repeat what I already said: There is a performance cost to "looking around" in 3d environments, the pc back in the day ran games and also ran the same games with features (features we take for granted today) that consoles couldn't do, and the pc had a different control standard. This adds up to comparing apples to oranges.

Which again brings us back it's not even a good example of a classic game that could be better 'if only' because it depends on the game being compared across platforms.

Which in the first place was always painting too fine a line because you're trying to argue Michael Jordan could be better. It's like trying to convince Bezos he could have been richer 'if only.' It's rather pointless.

I played a ton of classic games without options.

 

[Guilty_AI]

No it doesn't. If you knew anything about GTA 3 you would know that camera movement is limited by hardware.

In GTA 3, traffic despawns due to technical limitations (PS2 memory) and can be manually triggered by cycling camera angles in a car.

This is because the memory on the PS2 could not keep what is around you loaded in memory while showing you stuff beside or behind you. So when you cycle it clears everything not in veiw from memory and spawns a new set based on the new view in that instant. Even movement speed (of camera/player) was limited in GTA3 due to DVD drive streaming speed.

Wouldn't really stop a free camera from being implemented though, as the game clearly doesn't bother hiding it from you either way.

Pretty sure the differences were more due to preconceived notions from the time. PC players liked FPS so they gave FPS-ish controls to the pc version, whereas ps2 maintaned auto+directional aim that were more typical of console games for the time.

 

[kevboard]

No it doesn't. If you knew anything about GTA 3 you would know that camera movement is limited by hardware.

In GTA 3, traffic despawns due to technical limitations (PS2 memory) and can be manually triggered by cycling camera angles in a car.

This is because the memory on the PS2 could not keep what is around you loaded in memory while showing you stuff beside or behind you. So when you cycle it clears everything not in veiw from memory and spawns a new set based on the new view in that instant. Even movement speed (of camera/player) was limited in GTA3 due to DVD drive streaming speed.

explain how the car camera is possible then

you can literally not be serious... either you and T tr1p1ex are just trolling at this point, or you both don't know how videogames work

 

[tr1p1ex]

explain how the car camera is possible then

you can literally not be serious... either you and T tr1p1ex are just trolling at this point, or you both don't know how videogames work

Explain to me daddy how the world works.

 

[Hadoukens]

The argument seems to be that of older BC games on new consoles. It seems to be about shoehorning an option that doesn't play well in case of a new gen in future that plays it acceptably. Not sure that is a great option. It is far better to have a "boost mode" built into the console like we have already and just have an unlocked framerate mode with DRS.

Well I see a few people acting crazy like it shouldn't even be an option so they were who I was addressing.




As far as what you're talking about, I'm just going to sidestep that by saying when I see things like Ninja Gaiden 2 still supported on a Series X nearly 20 years later, at 4k60 no less(!!), and PC always having been backwards compatible, and modern consoles using PC architecture for the past decade....

well it's kinda past the time for good will towards those who do it, and it feels more like an industry that's become known for milking the customer dry, is continuing to milk the customer dry.

I know it's not a reality for consoles for a myriad of reasons and that's why I moved to PC a long time ago, so frankly I could and probably should stop here.

But at the same time I can't help but think it's kind of excuses at this point for any console game released in the past decade to not be designed for future performance and quality options. If I still bought consoles and console games it would feel like a kick in the nuts.

But then that's a big reason why I don't bother with consoles anymore.

 

[kevboard]

Explain to me daddy how the world works.

there's basically just 3 possibilities now:
1: you both are insanely stupid
2: you never played GTA Vice City or 3
3: you're trolling


which is it?

 

[MMaRsu]

For years console players said they didnt want options, they said 30fps was good enough

Then they got some 60fps choices, and now they demand a 60fps patch for every game

I love consoles but if you want these options the route is clear

 

[tr1p1ex]

Well I see a few people acting crazy like it shouldn't even be an option so they were who I was addressing.




As far as what you're talking about, I'm just going to sidestep that by saying when I see things like Ninja Gaiden 2 still supported on a Series X nearly 20 years later, at 4k60 no less(!!), and PC always having been backwards compatible, and modern consoles using PC architecture for the past decade....

well it's kinda past the time for good will towards those who do it, and it feels more like an industry that's become known for milking the customer dry, is continuing to milk the customer dry.

I know it's not a reality for consoles for a myriad of reasons and that's why I moved to PC a long time ago, so frankly I could and probably should stop here.

But at the same time I can't help but think it's kind of excuses at this point for any console game released in the past decade to not be designed for future performance and quality options. If I still bought consoles and console games it would feel like a kick in the nuts.

But then that's a big reason why I don't bother with consoles anymore.

Last thing I worry about is will the game I'm playing now run at the standard settings of the year of our lord 2046.

 

[Knightime_X]

Kind of goes against the whole plug and play ideal of consoles, though. I don't even like the current quality/performace toggles you get in some games.

Developers should just pick the intended settings, I don't want to be messing with menus and checking the impact on performance in something like Smash Bros. I hate having to do that on PC, always makes me think there's some setting I might have missed that makes the game smoother or better looking.

C'mon man. not that hard.
I was figuring stuff out when I was 14.
I didn't even have google or videos to help me.

 

[Fable]

For years console players said they didnt want options, they said 30fps was good enough

Then they got some 60fps choices, and now they demand a 60fps patch for every game

I love consoles but if you want these options the route is clear

Yes, the route is on consoles, as evidenced by the last 5 years where most titles on consoles have performance mode/runs at 60fps.

 

[Fable]

C'mon man. not that hard.
I was figuring stuff out when I was 14.
I didn't even have google or videos to help me.

Pressing a toggle can be mighty dangerous.

 

[kevboard]

there's basically just 3 possibilities now:
1: you both are insanely stupid
2: you never played GTA Vice City or 3
3: you're trolling


which is it?

just so that everyone understands.

the 2 super high IQ individuals T tr1p1ex and T Three think that this game could not work on PS2 with a manual camera on the right stick because the PS2 COULDN'T HANDLE IT because it wouldn't be able to load assets fast enough.



watch this video and see if you can notice an issue with their super intelligent theory:

 

[Hadoukens]

Last thing I worry about is will the game I'm playing now run at the standard settings of the year of our lord 2046.

Alright well, I prefer spending money on things that will last as long as possible regardless whether I actually will or not.

It's nice to play a classic and have it just work with modern hardware with better visuals and performance. And there's no reason to expect otherwise barring outlier circumstances.

 

[vkbest]

I really think they should make the same options they do for PC in a hidden menu (excluding things could potentially crash because the memory capacity). I remember they made those options in one of the remaster of Star Ocean.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I really think they should make the same options they do for PC in a hidden menu (excluding things could potentially crash because the memory capacity).

I believe abstraction layer differences is the issue of having too much to tweak on the console end. Cert'ing, etc..

But they can get very close as you said by certain things being excluded.

 

[HRK69]

T tr1p1ex
T Three

 

[Sand Dan Glokta]

I'm flabbergasted at some of the barely sentient creatures here that are arguing against gamers having more graphical options on their consoles.

What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Fable]

I really think they should make the same options they do for PC in a hidden menu (excluding things could potentially crash because the memory capacity). I remember they made those options in one of the remaster of Star Ocean.

What the hack you taking about?
People are scared of a simple toggle for 30fps/60fps, and you want more PC options?
Hell no! we want to play at sub 30fps and whatever res the dev wants on our better PS6 hardware!
We want to keep those delicious 30fps on our new 4K 120hz TV we just bought for thousand bucks!
It's plug and play dude! No toggles allowed.

 

[vkbest]

I believe abstraction layer differences is the issue of having too much to tweak on the console end. Cert'ing, etc..

But they can get very close as you said by certain things being excluded.

They don't do because only a minimum fractions would touch those settings unless the preconfigured modes are trash, and because they would have to spend more resources on support. Also they can hide some poor optimization on consoles in this way.

 

[tr1p1ex]

They don't do because only a minimum fractions would touch those settings unless the preconfigured modes are trash, and because they would have to spend more resources on support. Also they can hide some poor optimization on consoles in this way.

Yep. Those who know know.

 

[Three]

there's basically just 3 possibilities now:
1: you both are insanely stupid
2: you never played GTA Vice City or 3
3: you're trolling


which is it?

Look, I really couldn't give a shit what you think. You can be as arrogant and ignorant as you like but I played GTA3 religiously decades ago on a PS2. I just doing agree with your idea that camera/movement limitations cannot be based on the hardware. You touted a helicopter moving in all directions but again the hardware limitations and preventing fast movement due to hardware limitations was the reason GTA 3 only had the dodo. Even a rockstar dev confirmed this. You constantly bringing up Vice city doesn't mean they couldn't have made improvements when that released but a lot of the things implemented on GTA3 on console were from its hardware limitations.

 

[vkbest]

What the hack you taking about?
People are scared of a simple toggle for 30fps/60fps, and you want more PC options?
Hell no! we want to play at sub 30fps and whatever res the dev wants on our better PS6 hardware!
We want to keep those delicious 30fps on our new 4K 120hz TV we just bought for thousand bucks!
It's plug and play dude! No toggles allowed.

You are already getting those toggles for things such as Bloom, DOF, motion blur, chromatic aberration, etc. Also, I said a hidden menu, people who don't want to tweak simply will use the configuration from developer. Also, games like Jedi Survivor show sometimes the pre configured option from developers sucks

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

There are several games with fps, resolutions and others option on consoles, the last even in games of the NES era, so no, not just a PC thing.

Right, but not all games on console have these options, which is why you get people constantly begging for a 60 FPS boost on games like red dead 2 which already have 60 FPS on PC.

 

[Fable]

You are already getting those toggles for things such as Bloom, DOF, motion blur, chromatic aberration, etc. Also, I said a hidden menu, people who don't want to tweak simply will use the configuration from developer.

I was obviously sarcastic

 

[Fable]

Right, but not all games on console have these options, which is why you get people constantly begging for a 60 FPS boost on games like red dead 2 which already have 60 FPS on PC.

The real change regarding fps on consoles began this gen so RDR2 is a bit late to the party but will get there eventually.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You are already getting those toggles for things such as Bloom, DOF, motion blur, chromatic aberration, etc. Also, I said a hidden menu, people who don't want to tweak simply will use the configuration from developer. Also, games like Jedi Survivor show sometimes the pre configured option from developers sucks

Most of that is post-processing (higher level abstraction) and easier to implement.

But yeah, would be nice at the very least for all games to have "unlock framerate" due to VRR, etc.. Most are starting to do that now though, so that's a promising sign.

 

[kevboard]

Look, I really couldn't give a shit what you think. You can be as arrogant and ignorant as you like but I played GTA3 religiously decades ago on a PS2. I just doing agree with your idea that camera/movement limitations cannot be based on the hardware. You touted a helicopter moving in all directions but again the hardware limitations and preventing fast movement due to hardware limitations was the reason GTA 3 only had the dodo. Even a rockstar dev confirmed this. You constantly bringing up Vice city doesn't mean they couldn't have made improvements when that released but a lot of the things implemented on GTA3 on console were from its hardware limitations.

THE CAMERA WAS NOT A HARDWARE LIMITATION.
thinking it was, shows an UNFATHOMABLE lack of of understanding how a video game functions.
and that is a fact.

what I did in this clip of VC can be 100% replicated in GTA3... even the buttons I'd need to press are identical.


so, one last time:
if you say not having camera controls on the right analog stick in GTA3/VC was due to a hardware limitation, you are either stupid as all hell, or you are trolling. there's no third option.

and how the hell do you expect me not to sound condescending? what you claim is the equivalent of someone claiming that elephants are born with wings. it's an absolutely outlandish thing to say

 

[Three]

well it's kinda past the time for good will towards those who do it, and it feels more like an industry that's become known for milking the customer dry, is continuing to milk the customer dry.

I'd agree for nintendo to some extent but most performance patches have been free on xbox/PS. It's only times where the game no longer really gets any support from the dev where we don't even get a choice of being "milked dry". If they were trying to milk me they would actually need to release something to sell. Unless there is a bloodborne patch or RDR2 performance patch for sale on some store that I'm unaware of then I'm just going to disagree on that theory of yours.

 

[Three]

THE CAMERA WAS NOT A HARDWARE LIMITATION.
thinking it was, shows an UNFATHOMABLE lack of of understanding how a video game functions.
and that is a fact.

what I did in this clip of VC can be 100% replicated in GTA3... even the buttons I'd need to press are identical.


so, one last time:
if you say not having camera controls on the right analog stick in GTA3/VC was due to a hardware limitation, you are either stupid as all hell, or you are trolling. there's no third option.

and how the hell do you expect me not to sound condescending? what you claim is the equivalent of someone claiming that elephants are born with wings. it's an absolutely outlandish thing to say

Which clip? I don't know what you're referring to there. No it's not like saying an elephant is born with wings because where the hell are the wings? That has empirical evidence.

What it's like is trying to discern why I chose to put my bed next to a wall. Is it because I didn't have space for it anywhere else or because I like it being there. You have no way of knowing unless you see the source code and the games performance profiles.

You just like to make it seem like what you're saying is always 100% accurate when often it's arrogant and condescending for no reason. you did the same when we were discussing 3D audio and I know you were 100% wrong in your understanding there. Didn't resort to trying to call you insanely stupid and saying that's the only option. it clearly isn't in this case either but you just believe it is.

 

[Killer8]

Never going to happen. All it takes is for a few tards to accidentally enable the very high settings and then complain that their console is busted because it's now chugging out 15fps. Then the Sony support line gets overloaded and they need to recruit thousands of Bandladeshi call center workers to tell people to do a system reset.

You have to remember this about most players:

 

[SpokkX]

Consoles are for a specific purpose - simple and limited for people who are not tech minded.

Steam exists for people who want to do more

 

[kevboard]

Which clip? I don't know what you're referring to there. No it's not like saying an elephant is born with wings because where the hell are the wings? That has empirical evidence.

that clip

What it's like is trying to discern why I chose to put my bed next to a wall. Is it because I didn't have space for it anywhere else or because I like it being there. You have no way of knowing unless you see the source code and the games performance profiles.

You just like to make it seem like what you're saying is always 100% accurate when often it's arrogant and condescending for no reason. you did the same when we were discussing 3D audio and I know you were 100% wrong in your understanding there. Didn't resort to trying to call you insanely stupid and saying that's the only option. it clearly isn't in this case either but you just believe it is.

and here's GTA3:



if you think, a camera on the right stick would be a performance concern for GTA3 or VC, you are indeed stupid... there's just no other way to say this unless I'd try to beat around the bush, trying to be overly polite... and nah,
I'll just call you stupid if you watch these videos, know how these games play, and still think a camera on the right stick is not possible due to technical limitations.

 

[Hadoukens]

The problem with this conversation is that the goalposts keep moving.


OP was suggesting that modern consoles should have some graphical options and that's what I responded to. Yes it should.


Everyone replying to me since then is talking about other things.

But even that's not complicated.

Rockstar, Nintendo, Capcom, any big publisher is going to get disdain for nickel and diming their customers for resolution and framerate updates, the games should be designed for adjusting those already.

For games that weren't designed that way, customers are still going to balk at paying for something the newer console should already be able to do in its own.

I'm not expecting a defunct or small studio to go back and do this to a game not made for it.

We're 30+ years into 3d graphics, and plenty of really really old stuff works at any fps and resolution you throw at it. Newer stuff should be designed that way too. We've had 30 years of PC ports and emulators embarassing console games.

Now if a dev puts some effort into a proper remake or a substantial upgrade then of course I'm not going to get upset about paying something for that but it should be fair. And fair should be obvious.

A re-released port where the console is doing all the work should be cheap or free
A slight remaster should be cheap
A complete overhaul or remake should be more expensive
And a new product is expected to be new product pricing.

And even if the reality doesn't match customer expectation, there's always going to be a tug of war between seller and buyer.

As far as Bloodborne is concerned, it *should have* been designed with this in mind on release.

From Software should have learned this lesson way back with Dark Souls 1 and DSFix.

Again the reason I'm on PC is so I don't have to care about this nonsense and every edge case as if I'm a CEO or shareholder of a giant publisher. These decisions are on them. And if they can't or won't talk to their customers about perceived value, again that's on them.

Have I covered every possible argument yet? I certainly think there's absolutely nothing left to discuss from my perspective.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Consoles are for a specific purpose - simple and limited for people who are not tech minded.

No, they are not. There are consoles that run browsers, homebrews, emulators, apps, mods, etc etc... They can be almost anything the "manufacturer" wants.

 

[Boss Mog]

Unless it's linked to game mechanics like regen or swing speed setting framerate is a single line in the INI file.

Next time you wanna lecture somebody, try asking AI if what you're saying is valid, it will prevent you from seeming foolish.

 

[Three]

that clip




and here's GTA3:



if you think, a camera on the right stick would be a performance concern for GTA3 or VC, you are indeed stupid... there's just no other way to say this unless I'd try to beat around the bush, trying to be overly polite... and nah,
I'll just call you stupid if you watch these videos, know how these games play, and still think a camera on the right stick is not possible due to technical limitations.

I'm not necessarily saying it is. Never did. I'm saying it is a possibility and I don't understand why you're so certain and arrogant about it not being the case. You claimed that camera movement can't be constrained by performance but it absolutely can based on how somebody decides to play. You mentioned a helicopter in vice city but I posted the dev pointing out that the helicopter in Vice city was only possible after they made improvements to GTA3 which they intentionally limited due to the memory of consoles. ie the improvement being "Smarter code that would load the detailed versions of buildings only if the player was not flying". There were games that slowed camera movement due to performance and it absolutely could have been a decision based on it not working well in gameplay due to stuttery or slow movement of camera pans if the player changed playstyle. Even FOV options were removed on consoles back in 2003 due to performance limitations. Question is why are you so certain and calling others stupid when there is absolutely no evidence for why they chose to do that?

That's not a PS2 btw either. You're on an emulator I'm guessing? Try at 480 with an interlaced image on an actual PS2. See how amazing that experience is panning about with a low framerate. The experience was different on progressively scanned monitors and that too influenced some game design decisions in the past.

I never said it can't load assets fast enough either I actually said it spawns them in that instant you change cam I said it doesn't have enough memory to keep them when they are off screen hence the ability to despawn things by cycling the cam. The slow asset loading was referring to limiting other camera movement like slowing the player down when driving.

 

[TintoConCasera]

just so that everyone understands.

the 2 super high IQ individuals T tr1p1ex and T Three think that this game could not work on PS2 with a manual camera on the right stick because the PS2 COULDN'T HANDLE IT because it wouldn't be able to load assets fast enough.



watch this video and see if you can notice an issue with their super intelligent theory:

The video's title!

 

[SpokkX]

No, they are not. There are consoles that run browsers, homebrews, emulators, apps, mods, etc etc... They can be almost anything the "manufacturer" wants.

Nice i will start running emulatorns, homebrew and mod on my PS5 and Switch! - it should work out of the box, right?

 

[rodrigolfp]

Nice i will start running emulatorns, homebrew and mod on my PS5 and Switch! - it should work out of the box, right?

Emulators, homebrews are a thing on jailbroke PS5 and mods are even official supported like in Skyrim.