Support NeoGAF

[Louis Cyphre]

I enjoy this hobby. And I have a vested interest in making sure it doesn't go to shit for as long as possible.

I love having these discussions in the first place, or I wouldn't participate. So I get enjoyment just from that. But, I also do believe it's vitally important that consumers stick up for themselves, no matter how minor the issue may seem, because it serves as a warning when companies want to try even larger or more egregious oversteps. And as we have seen, it does work. Companies do change their behavior when there is enough backlash.

I have no delusions that it's about curing cancer, that's why I regularly march for causes I find important - like gay marriage - and volunteer from time to time at a local elderly home. Those sorts of things are far more important. But one thing being a more important issue does not really negate something else also being an issue, and there's plenty of time to satisfy both my love of this hobby and the concerns I have for it with far more significant considerations in the "real world."



I mean, I have a great PC that could run Unity at 60fps if they had the option. But, I can't really support a game/company that admits to doing stuff like this. Principle and all. Plenty of other games out there that can get my money without me having to be disrespected as a consumer

Nobody can fault you for sticking to your beliefs but I'm not about to let a game that runs at parity to the XBOX One get in my way if it's an enjoyable game. That's not to mean my way is better than yours.

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

 

[Cole Slaw]

Can I ask an honest question, do you get more enjoyment out of talking about these sorts of practices or playing games? When do we get so invested in the politics of gaming that it in turn ruins our ability to enjoy a game based solely on how much fun we have? I understand you are making the jump to what the future looks like because if we support these practices how will they ever change, but some of you act like your trying to cure cancer or something.

I guess one solution would be to buy the PC version since that's really the only platform that isn't controlled by any one entity who will spend hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing just to get you to buy their hardware.

Can I ask an honest question, why weren't you playing some games when you came up with this tripe? When do you get so invested in what Amir0x or anyone thinks? If you understand that current practices affect future playability, thereby having a direct impact on enjoyability, then you already understand why politics matter.

If it were up to people like you, nobody would call Destiny out for being a gutted game so it can sell a more complete package as part of DLC instead. If we didn't care about the politics of that, we'd probably already be paying $60 for demos and another $60 for each level, map, mission, etc.

It's difficult to cure cancer when people like you are the cancer, telling us that we should just bend over every time the publishers want to shovelware their crap into our systems.

 

[Amir0x]

Nobody can fault you for sticking to your beliefs but I'm not about to let a game that runs at parity to the XBOX One get in my way if it's an enjoyable game. That's not to mean my way is better than yours.

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

But... PS4 is selling better. And almost all multiplatform games look and ran better on Xbox 360 due to PS3's ridiculously complicated architecture! And yeah, it never ever stopped devs from making sure the Xbox 360 versions ran better, and I know because that's where I got almost all my games last gen. None of this false parity nonsense. I can't even believe any developer admitted to gimping their game due to "debate", I mean, that's the most shocking thing. That they actually admitted to their shady practices out loud.

 

[stryke]

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

Was the reason behind any of these was to avoid "debates and stuff"? Because that's the key issue here, not parity at 900p.

 

[oni-link]

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment.

Yeah it makes sense to design your game for the system that is selling the most, the PS2 outsold the other 2 by miles, and at the start of last gen the 360 was a better proposition than the PS3, it sold better and it was easier to program for

This gen the PS4 has more power, is easier to get games to 1080 on, and is selling the most, so that argument doesn't really apply in this case

 

[SolidSnakex]

Publishers might have expected the issue to die down with time. It clearly hasn't, so this might be an attempt to force a swift resolution of this matter, pardon the pun. Look, I really don't know and I don't want to speculate. What I do know is that console wars have been a thing for decades and parity, while it obviously won't make everyone happy, may be considered the lesser of two evils.

I really can't see how it's the lesser of evils. One has you involved in console wars, the other has you being viewed as a company that doesn't give all consumers the most for their money. That's where they're at with Unity and why you see people cancelling their pre-orders. You don't really see that with the other option.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

Nobody can fault you for sticking to your beliefs but I'm not about to let a game that runs at parity to the XBOX One get in my way if it's an enjoyable game. That's not to mean my way is better than yours.

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

A lot of multiplat games had a higher resolution on the 360 dude.

 

[travisbickle]

Is this still going on? Don't you understand his point?

When he said that they "lock them at the same specs to avoid all the debates and stuff" he was talking about the recent moronic debates that MS had managed to close the gap. With his quote he is saying that the only time you will see the same resolution/effects on both systems is when the developer forces parity. End debates/discussion about closing the gap.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Can I ask an honest question, why weren't you playing some games when you came up with this tripe? When do you get so invested in what Amir0x or anyone thinks? If you understand that current practices affect future playability, thereby having a direct impact on enjoyability, then you already understand why politics matter.

If it were up to people like you, nobody would call Destiny out for being a gutted game so it can sell a more complete package as part of DLC instead. If we didn't care about the politics of that, we'd probably already be paying $60 for demos and another $60 for each level, map, mission, etc.

It's difficult to cure cancer when people like you are the cancer, telling us that we should just bend over every time the publishers want to shovelware their crap into our systems.

My point was if Asssassins Creed Unity is fun I would buy it regardless of the XBOX One being at parity with the PS4 because I would likely get it on the PC anyways. Your whole tangent about Destiny makes no sense. They are calling out Bungie for not fulfilling their vision of what consumers thought the game would be and instead look to be selling DLC. It's also being criticized for its gameplay, so how exactly does that relate to if Assassincs Creed Unity is good I will buy it even if they wanted to create the game for parity on the new consoles?

But... PS4 is selling better. And almost all multiplatform games look and ran better on Xbox 360 due to PS3's ridiculously complicated architecture! And yeah, it never ever stopped devs from making sure the Xbox 360 versions ran better, and I know because that's where I got almost all my games last gen. None of this false parity nonsense. I can't even believe any developer admitted to gimping their game due to "debate", I mean, that's the most shocking thing. That they actually admitted to their shady practices out loud.

The last part I totally agree, why admit it? Other than that I believe this practice has existed in the past and will continue to exist.

Yeah it makes sense to design your game for the system that is selling the most, the PS2 outsold the other 2 by miles, and at the start of last gen the 360 was a better proposition than the PS3, it sold better and it was easier to program for

This gen the PS4 has more power, is easier to get games to 1080 on, and is selling the most, so that argument doesn't really apply in this case

I get it but does that still give them the benefit of the doubt when many want the best version if it's possible? I also understand social media is much stronger today than back then which is why it's a bigger deal now.

A lot of multiplat games had a higher resolution on the 360 dude.

That's the point, the PS3 was technically better but developers didn't always want to face the task of getting those games to perform better.

 

[Amir0x]

The last part I totally agree, why admit it? Other than that I believe this practice has existed in the past and will continue to exist.

I mean it's a theory, but where is the evidence? Virtually every multiplatform game that came out look and ran significantly better on 360 than PS3. Did this issue skip a generation or something?

 

[alexandros]

I really can't see how it's the lesser of evils. One has you involved in console wars, the other has you being viewed as a company that doesn't give all consumers the most for their money. That's where they're at with Unity and why you see people cancelling their pre-orders. You don't really see that with the other option.

But we don't really know when or even if consumers get the most for their money. Do you know for sure that you got the most for your money with Shadows of Mordor? Do you know if the developers took advantage of 70%, 80% or 100% of your system's capabilities? You don't, but through the comparison with the Xbox version you are creating a mental construct that makes you think all is well because the other version runs worse.

 

[Chobel]

Unity aside, are there any evidences about MS' contracts with third parties to enforce parity? The issue is very interesting and I think might be of great importance in understanding the topic. If anyone has some information please share them, thanks

We have this, and let's just say the guy knows

eh. let's not cannonize one as holy and the other as pure evil here.

i don't know the terms of these particularly agreements, but both first parties have various parity clauses. always have.

though, as goes life, everything can be negotiated.

Did MS ask for parity in the marketing contract? We don't know. However it's not out of realm of possibility for MS to do that.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

I mean it's a theory, but where is the evidence? Virtually every multiplatform game that came out look and ran significantly better on 360 than PS3. Did this issue skip a generation or something?

Not too many games so far have performed better on the XBOX One (have any?) so which generation have they skipped? PS2 was weaker to that of the XBOX, XBOX 360 was weaker to that of the PS3.

AC Unity has yet to come out, it may have the same frame rate and resolution for now (they have set it's still not set in stone) but the PS4 may still have better effects and could still be technically superior.

 

[Cole Slaw]

My point was if Asssassins Creed Unity is fun I would buy it regardless of the XBOX One being at parity with the PS4 because I would likely get it on the PC anyways. Your whole tangent about Destiny makes no sense. They are calling out Bungie for not fulfilling their vision of what consumers thought the game would be and instead look to be selling DLC. It's also being criticized for its gameplay, so how exactly does that relate to if Assassincs Creed Unity is good I will buy it even if they wanted to create the game for parity on the new consoles?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, little Jack, you specifically asked Amir0x why he cares about the politics, and even tried to equate that to trying to cure cancer. Don't act like your intention was to only focus on ACU being fun or not.

When you bring politics into the discussion (which you did), and ask why it matters, then you invite every little tangent on the politics of gaming that affect the enjoyability of gaming, including my little tangent on Destiny. The only reason you are trying to deflect that from having any relevancy is because you're trying to deflect the whole issue of forced parity to begin with. Your only argument is that the game is still going to be fun, which isn't even what this thread is about. You are practically off-topic.

Also, you keep going on about how you don't care about the forced parity, and then go on to say you're going to get the game for PC anyway. Well, news flash, this thread is about the forced parity, and it's about the PS4 and XO.

 

[Amir0x]

Not too many games so far have performed better on the XBOX One (have any?) so which generation have they skipped? PS2 was weaker to that of the XBOX, XBOX 360 was weaker to that of the PS3.

AC Unity has yet to come out, it may have the same frame rate and resolution for now (they have set it's still not set in stone) but the PS4 may still have better effects and could still be technically superior.

What are you talking about man? You said you think this issue - that is, forced parity - has always existed. Yet, there is zero evidence for that at all.

What ports XBox got from PS2 were essentially always significantly superior. Ergo, factually no forced parity.

PS3's issue was an incredibly complicated system architecture which made porting games an absolute nightmare. Due to this architecture issue, Xbox 360 received superior versions of essentially every multiplatform game. Again, no forced parity whatsoever.

There were massive differences between PS1, N64 and Saturn ports. Massive differences between SNES and Genesis ports. Again, in no case do we have any evidence whatsoever of forced parity. Indeed, the evidence we see suggests the exact contrary position is true.

So again, I ask you: what are you talking about?

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, little Jack, you specifically asked Amir0x why he cares about the politics, and even tried to equate that to trying to cure cancer. Don't act like your intention was to only focus on ACU being fun or not.

When you bring politics into the discussion (which you did), and ask why it matters, then you invite every little tangent on the politics of gaming that affect the enjoyability of gaming, including my little tangent on Destiny. The only reason you are trying to deflect that from having any relevancy is because you're trying to deflect the whole issue of forced parity to begin with. Your only argument is that the game is still going to be fun, which isn't even what this thread is about. You are practically off-topic.

Also, you keep going on about how you don't care about the forced parity, and then go on to say you're going to get the game for PC anyway. Well, news flash, this thread is about the forced parity, and it's about the PS4 and XO.

Politics and complaining about games for not being fun are two different things. I'm not sure where you went from Destiny isn't that fun and a lot of stuff seems to be missing to They don't want to utilize the full power of the PS4. I'm also not going to exempt myself and pretend I don't also get involved with some of the politics that go into games now, namely forcing online and DLC tactics. But what I am trying to do is distance myself from enjoying games because of it and will continue to make my purchases based on the content given, not on some ethical clause I created (no offence to those who do).

So to leap from we are all talking about politics therefore everyone should stand together and not buy this game because of Ubisoft not wanting to deal with console feuds is a far far stretch there sport.

 

[oni-link]

I don't see what good a boycott of the PS4 version would do, because lets be honest, no Xbone owners are going to boycott the Xbone version because the PS4 version wasn't better

That's if that even does any damage, as to most people AC is about running on rooftops and stabbing people, not 900 or 1080p

The only thing it will do is tell Ubisoft that the game is a more "Xbox" friendly game and probably put even more support onto that version of future titles in the series

If it is a marketing deal, then you can tweet them and yell at them all you like, they won't come out and say it is, as that's probably a violation of the marketing deal

Plus, they're a business, and if they are set to make more money with a marketing deal then why does anyone expect them to refuse out of "honour to the gaming spirit"

If that's the case then any anger at Ubisoft is misplaced, they want to make a fun game that sells a lot and makes a lot of money, and this is the course of action that will probably achieve that

 

[thelastcrusader]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, little Jack, you specifically asked Amir0x why he cares about the politics, and even tried to equate that to trying to cure cancer. Don't act like your intention was to only focus on ACU being fun or not.

When you bring politics into the discussion (which you did), and ask why it matters, then you invite every little tangent on the politics of gaming that affect the enjoyability of gaming, including my little tangent on Destiny. The only reason you are trying to deflect that from having any relevancy is because you're trying to deflect the whole issue of forced parity to begin with. Your only argument is that the game is still going to be fun, which isn't even what this thread is about. You are practically off-topic.

Also, you keep going on about how you don't care about the forced parity, and then go on to say you're going to get the game for PC anyway. Well, news flash, this thread is about the forced parity, and it's about the PS4 and XO.

Technically little Louie*, but yes you're right. This thread is about Ubisoft's shit practice and gimping a console to benefit another. That is what this is about, not about how much fun Unity might be! If this were an essay for school I'd imagine the prompt would be: Ubisoft is setting a precedent of dicking over gamers in order to benefit their current marketing partner. Unlike past partnerships that focused on timed exclusive content or exclusive costumes, this particular instance involves gimping an entire release in order to force parity. Please write as a paying customer why you feel this is right or wrong.

 

[Cole Slaw]

Politics and complaining about games for not being fun are two different things. I'm not sure where you went from Destiny isn't that fun and a lot of stuff seems to be missing to They don't want to utilize the full power of the PS4. I'm also not going to exempt myself and pretend I don't also get involved with some of the politics that go into games now, namely forcing online and DLC tactics. But what I am trying to do is distance myself from enjoying games because of it and will continue to make my purchases based on the content given, not on some ethical clause I created (no offence to those who do).

So to leap from we are all talking about politics therefore everyone should stand together and not buy this game because of Ubisoft not wanting to deal with console feuds is a far far stretch there sport.

You are just intentionally being obtuse now. Destiny was used as an example to explain (to you) why politics matter and how they affect the enjoyment of games. In effect, Destiny was used as an example to directly answer the questions that you posed to Amir0x about ACU, because Destiny is an already released game and therefore can actually be used as an example. That's where the leap is coming from, you nunce.

 

[Chobel]

Calm down Cole Slaw, no need for name calling.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

That's the point, the PS3 was technically better but developers didn't always want to face the task of getting those games to perform better.

It's a backwards and bad point. What matters is which console is easier to get a higher resolution running on it, and that was 360 last gen. The ps3 was harder to develop for despite comparsions on paper. Holding back multiplat resolutions last gen on the 360 would have been a shit move.

 

[Night Angel]

I don't see what good a boycott of the PS4 version would do, because lets be honest, no Xbone owners are going to boycott the Xbone version because the PS4 version wasn't better

That's if that even does any damage, as to most people AC is about running on rooftops and stabbing people, not 900 or 1080p

The only thing it will do is tell Ubisoft that the game is a more "Xbox" friendly game and probably put even more support onto that version of future titles in the series

Except for the whole lost sales thing. You know, the part where Ubi only makes money when people buy the game? Pretty sure that's the point of a boycott. If this is their first game that underperforms on the PS4 (not that I think it will have that big of an effect), they'll notice.

I'm not buying it on principle. I'll grab it used for $20 so don't see a dime of my money... I have enough games to play as it is.

 

[CrazyDude]

Except for the whole lost sales thing. You know, the part where Ubi only makes money when people buy the game? Pretty sure that's the point of a boycott. If this is their first game that underperforms on the PS4 (not that I think it will have that big of an effect), they'll notice.

They'll notice that it doesn't sell on PS4 but does sells on Xbone, further proving to them that it was a good move to focus on Xbone. Boycotts need to be followed with letters to the company are else it will send a completely different message,

 

[nelsonroyale]

I don't see what good a boycott of the PS4 version would do, because lets be honest, no Xbone owners are going to boycott the Xbone version because the PS4 version wasn't better

That's if that even does any damage, as to most people AC is about running on rooftops and stabbing people, not 900 or 1080p

The only thing it will do is tell Ubisoft that the game is a more "Xbox" friendly game and probably put even more support onto that version of future titles in the series

If it is a marketing deal, then you can tweet them and yell at them all you like, they won't come out and say it is, as that's probably a violation of the marketing deal

Plus, they're a business, and if they are set to make more money with a marketing deal then why does anyone expect them to refuse out of "honour to the gaming spirit"

If that's the case then any anger at Ubisoft is misplaced, they want to make a fun game that sells a lot and makes a lot of money, and this is the course of action that will probably achieve that

On the flip side I doubt this is going to gain customers for the series on the Xbone. Likely they can only lose PS4 customers. Now personally I don't think this should be the main reason why people should boycott the game, I think the fact that they regurgitate such repetitive core mechanics throughout their series is reason enough. They do seem to be trying to mix it up with this one. Having said that, if the game has parity across systems that is bull. The PS4 should be able to run any game at a better clip than Xbone. Even Ubisoft games in the past have run better on the system.

 

[Night Angel]

They'll notice that it doesn't sell on PS4 but does sells on Xbone, further proving to them that it was a good move to focus on Xbone.

Yeah, selling more on the platform with half the install base, I'm sure that's what they want.

 

[LordOfChaos]

Makes no sense to blame the CPUs and then say the GPU alone would be getting 100fps...A resolution bump then would be effectively free for the CPU.

 

[DustyVonEric]

They'll notice that it doesn't sell on PS4 but does sells on Xbone, further proving to them that it was a good move to focus on Xbone. Boycotts need to be followed with letters to the company are else it will send a completely different message,

You know this makes zero sense, right?

It not a good move to alienate the larger user base to the point that the smaller one outsells it. Jeez, man...

Not that I think a boycott will be large scale or anything, but Ubi needs that larger user base for growth.

 

[vpance]

Boycotts won't work, to be honest. Despite this massive thread here and all the tweets and everything it's likely they'll still continue to go through with parity in the end. It's sad, but thats the reality of the situation when Ubisoft sees themselves as invincible.

If this is going to be a reality for some big name multiplatform titles for the rest of the gen then Sony needs to step in like I suggested, and enable an internal resolution override setting to skirt around this political bullshit. I think it's quite feasible actually. I cant imagine they're happy at this situation at all, where the benefits of their platform are being surreptitiously nullified for whatever stupid reason.

 

[Cave Johnson]

Boycotts won't work, to be honest. Despite this massive thread here and all the tweets and everything it's likely they'll still continue to go through with parity in the end. It's sad, but thats the reality of the situation when Ubisoft sees themselves as invincible.

If this is going to be a reality for some big name multiplatform titles for the rest of the gen then Sony needs to step in like I suggested, and enable an internal resolution override setting to skirt around this political bullshit. I think it's quite feasible actually. I cant imagine they're happy at this situation at all, where the benefits of their platform are being surreptitiously nullified for whatever stupid reason.

Except your overlooking the fact that the production value rises significantly this generation. Every sale lost only harms the potential of making a profit especially when it comes to breaking even.

While the demand for better tech goes higher and higher, so too will the costs. It would be financial suicide go earn the ire of your consumers especially early in this generation.

 

[Cole Slaw]

Sony needs to step in like I suggested, and enable an internal resolution override setting to skirt around this political bullshit. I think it's quite feasible actually. I cant imagine they're happy at this situation at all, where the benefits of their platform are being surreptitiously nullified for whatever stupid reason.

I think this is the most succinct and accurate explanation as to why forced parity is such an abhorrent practice. It is anti-competitive to an extreme, and it artificially props up the XO while disparaging the PS4.

 

[The Lamp]

It's ironic that they did this to avoid gamer drama, and now we have a 141 page thread.

 

[Cole Slaw]

Except your overlooking the fact that the production value rises significantly this generation. Every sale lost only harms the potential of making a profit especially when it comes to breaking even.

While the demand for better tech goes higher and higher, so too will the costs. It would be financial suicide go earn the ire of your consumers especially early in this generation.

The other reason I don't believe that a boycott won't work is because all the 180s by Microsoft have proven that boycotts do work.

 

[Neuromancer]

Boycotts won't work, to be honest. Despite this massive thread here and all the tweets and everything it's likely they'll still continue to go through with parity in the end. It's sad, but thats the reality of the situation when Ubisoft sees themselves as invincible.

If this is going to be a reality for some big name multiplatform titles for the rest of the gen then Sony needs to step in like I suggested, and enable an internal resolution override setting to skirt around this political bullshit. I think it's quite feasible actually. I cant imagine they're happy at this situation at all, where the benefits of their platform are being surreptitiously nullified for whatever stupid reason.

Boycotts, or threats of boycotts and other complaints, can work in that they can gather a lot of unwanted attention a company would rather avoid. It might be too late for this game if there really is some kind of deal in place, but it's not too late for other games from other publishers.

 

[vpance]

Except your overlooking the fact that the production value rises significantly this generation. Every sale lost only harms the potential of making a profit especially when it comes to breaking even.

While the demand for better tech goes higher and higher, so too will the costs. It would be financial suicide go earn the ire of your consumers especially early in this generation.

I'd like to think that what were doing here with preorder cancellations and spreading the message is working, I really would. But the cynical part of me tells me it won't, because all it is is down to numbers, and I doubt we have them. The MS DRM backlash worked because the preorders showed it, and then some. That's the only way these massive corps will understand. Just look at how Ubisoft have been conducting themselves, with these repeated unachievable target renders and disingenuous PRs. They're on top of the world right now and can do no wrong.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Blame youtube. http://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_assassin_s_creed_unity_interview_d_alexandre_amancio-33182_en.html
^
Uncompressed version.

This still gets me good.

 

[vpance]

I think this is the most succinct and accurate explanation as to why forced parity is such an abhorrent practice. It is anti-competitive to an extreme, and it artificially props up the XO while disparaging the PS4.

Absolutely. Can Sony really sit there knowing the work they put into the hardware is being diminished? I really doubt it, and you know it, because at every conference in the last year they've mentioned how they always have the best versions of the games. Andrew House must be pissed he won't be able to use that line anymore. They need to nip this in the bud, fast.

 

[On Demand]

This still gets me good.

Heh. If it was uncompressed the data would be like 100 terabytes.

 

[R_Deckard]

Makes no sense to blame the CPUs and then say the GPU alone would be getting 100fps...A resolution bump then would be effectively free for the CPU.

Not if the bandwidth is being stolen by the GPU, they both have a relative link to the same path.

With the APU having much wider and thus less read/writes needed per cycle than on PC this will use more bandwidth.

I find it hard to believe that Ubisoft spend alot of time "optimising" for a specific platform as they have a Huge game engine factory and even the most recent clips have glitching and clear base issues. The team are pushed to the limit to get the core content and game finished, I bet the 2 week delay is the only optimisation they will get which will ship in a day 1 patch.

 

[tanooki27]

I think this is the most succinct and accurate explanation as to why forced parity is such an abhorrent practice. It is anti-competitive to an extreme, and it artificially props up the XO while disparaging the PS4.

well said

 

[Aces&Eights]

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

I remember the whole LA Noir "grass" debacle. I was a PS3 owner but was very excited about the new facial animation tech. I wasn't about to not play the game because the PS3 version had less polygons in the grass than the 360 version.

I get that it's a "principal" thing for some people to expect that the developer do whatever they can to make each version the best it can be. I really do. I also would love for that to happen. But, in reality, it's not. OK. I grumble and move on. Companies do whatever they need to maximize their profits. It's like the old adage that Firestone has the patent for a tire that will never wear out. They will never make it, of course, because then they can't sell us tires anymore once everyone buys a set. Shady and anti-consumer? Absolutely. Will I quit driving my car and walk everywhere to "show them!" Nope.

 

[CyberPunked]

Blame youtube. http://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_assassin_s_creed_unity_interview_d_alexandre_amancio-33182_en.html
^
Uncompressed version.

Damn, those visuals are really good. I was worried about a downgrade too.

 

[alexandros]

Absolutely. Can Sony really sit there knowing the work they put into the hardware is being diminished? I really doubt it, and you know it, because at every conference in the last year they've mentioned how they always have the best versions of the games. Andrew House must be pissed he won't be able to use that line anymore. They need to nip this in the bud, fast.

How?

 

[Omnipunctual Godot]

The other reason I don't believe that a boycott won't work is because all the 180s by Microsoft have proven that boycotts do work.

What?

 

[Cuyejo]

I find this whole ordeal incredibly funny. How can you fuck up so bad with your PR? What the fuck were they thinking?
But it gets even funnier now that they've "clarified" the situation by stating that the game specs are not final yet, just a little over a month BEFORE RELEASE !??!? (yeah Ubisoft I'm not buying that one) in a desperate measure of damage control, because they've crafted themselves a nice little ticking bomb that will blow up on their faces when the game comes out and nothing has changed. It's chain reaction of fuck ups after fuck ups.
Luckily I don't give a shit anything Ubisoft puts out that isn't Rayman.

 

[DustyVonEric]

I remember the whole LA Noir "grass" debacle. I was a PS3 owner but was very excited about the new facial animation tech. I wasn't about to not play the game because the PS3 version had less polygons in the grass than the 360 version.

I get that it's a "principal" thing for some people to expect that the developer do whatever they can to make each version the best it can be. I really do. I also would love for that to happen. But, in reality, it's not. OK. I grumble and move on. Companies do whatever they need to maximize their profits. It's like the old adage that Firestone has the patent for a tire that will never wear out. They will never make it, of course, because then they can't sell us tires anymore once everyone buys a set. Shady and anti-consumer? Absolutely. Will I quit driving my car and walk everywhere to "show them!" Nope.

To have the same specs because that's the game the devs wanted to make. Fine

To have the same specs because a lack of time or resources. Fine. It happens.

I would think someone would see the difference between these scenarios and what's been stated by the dev to be happening here, which is to lock the specs for political reasons (avoid debates).

And then go on to state that was the original target all along when it was revealed not to be the case. Ubi's behavior throughout this has been quite alarming to witness as a gamer and consumer.

That's the principle of this for me.

 

[PLASTICA-MAN]

Did anyone see this petition: http://www.gamepur.com/news/16492-f...ng-assassins-creed-unity-1080p60-fps-ps4.html ?

 

[Impeccable]

Did anyone see this petition: http://www.gamepur.com/news/16492-f...ng-assassins-creed-unity-1080p60-fps-ps4.html ?

No, petitions are silly.

 

[vpance]

How?

Politically they can't touch it, of course, with all the secret NDA blood oath stuff. My suggestion was for them to put in an internal resolution override setting in the system menu. At the end of the day, these consoles are just PC's running with custom API's, and doing this on PC is a relative cakewalk as we know. If you've got full control over the OS and the SDK I don't see why it's not possible.

 

[Omnipunctual Godot]

Lots of game last generation were designed for the XBOX 360 even though on paper it was weaker to the PS3. Same thing happened the generation prior, most games were designed for the PS2 and the XBOX didn't get the royal treatment. Is the fact whoever sells the best in North America at the time going to excuse them from this practice?

During the Xbox/PS2 era, any multiplatform title was essentially guaranteed to run better on the Xbox. This was normal operating procedure; it was usually just a question of how big the performance gap would be between the Xbox and PS2 version of a game, but it was something everyone came to accept and it was usually pointed out in reviews that the Xbox version had superior performance.

The 360 had advantages that the PS3 did not, which I believe included hardware that was easier to work with, better memory arrangement, and faster better GPU. I believe the PS3 had a much better CPU (the Cell Processor), but it was also very difficult to work with for many developers, coupled with the fact that, at the time, Sony's ICE team saw their gains in understanding the architecture as part of a competition with other developers instead of a collaboration. This is why there were quite a few examples of multiplatform games usually performing better on the 360, though sometimes performing better on the PS3: there wasn't a clear winner in terms of hardware power.

In this generation, none of these issues exist. Both consoles are essentially identical, and in the areas where they are not, the PS4 is superior, such as its memory, general GPU speed, ROPS, CPU, etc. This console generation makes the disparity as cut and dry as it has ever been, and it makes no sense whatsoever that this game would achieve parity unless one version is being held back while the other is being brought up.

 

[duessano]

It's like the old adage that Firestone has the patent for a tire that will never wear out. They will never make it, of course, because then they can't sell us tires anymore once everyone buys a set. Shady and anti-consumer? Absolutely. Will I quit driving my car and walk everywhere to "show them!" Nope.

Firestone isn't the only tire manufacturer. I can buy other companies tires and other companies games to "show them" Yep.