Support NeoGAF

[jem0208]

Oh man, this thread has turned into a bit of a tinfoil hat fest.

Let's get some evidence before we go throwing baseless speculation around as fact.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

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.

First you say I'm a cancer to the industry because I will still buy AC Unity if it's a good game, then you call me little Jack and now I'm a nunce. Anything else you want to get off your chest there Junior?

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.

But they held back resolutions on PS3 games, that's the point I was making. Sony's in-house titles were able to trump XBOX 360 games on a technical level. So as a PS3 owner (who paid more for their system expecting better performance) they often got shafted all because developers didn't want to spend the time on the hardware. And yes, this is a shit move to do this to PS4 owners when we all know the system isn't the problem for developers.

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?

Let me explain again. Even though developers never came out and said anything like this you don't think games on the PS3 and the XBOX before it were held back? Not intentionally but not getting the most out of the system? Doesn't that also give a middle finger to the consumer who had intentions their system was better so therefore should get the better version? This is the first console generation where the hardware leader also has the best system isn't it? So of course people are up in arms especially since the PS4 is not any more difficult to make games on than the XBOX One, in fact many have said the opposite. Still, like before, the lowest common denominator console has also been the case.

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.

Except in this case before this game I think every PS4 title has been better performance wise than the XBOX One. Which is why this stinks more.

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.

There was to an extent a clear winner when it came to exclusive titles though. Which again highlighted the fact many third party developers didn't go to the lengths that Sony's in-house studios did. As a consumer they should expect better, shouldn't they? Just like how XBOX owners expected more than the PS2 counterpart (which didn't always happen) and why PS4 owners should expect more.

Just ignore him. He always likes to start arguments & fights with posters.

He did it with me constantly. That's why I have him on my ignore list now.

Great job again at ignoring me, what's that, like the third time you told everyone? You make absolutely no sense, just the other day you quoted me and responded. How is this whole notion of I'm ignoring you working? Speaking of starting arguments, wasn't it you who came into a thread about console ports coming to the PC only to attack PC owners for being elitists and then telling everyone third party support is going to dry up? That didn't go over very well at all. In fact basically the whole Gaf community tore you apart and you retracted your statements several times only to confuse everyone with your intentions of being there even more so. Your whole objective was to be abrasive with PC gamers because in the end you felt threatened by the PC getting console games.

Why are you going off-topic anyways, to try and save face from being annihilated in that other thread? Let it go already.

 

[Alchemist]

IGN says the resolution doesn't matter. Ubisoft knows best.



Oh and Please visit IGN for our exclusive unboxing of some expensive piece of Assassins Creed swag Ubisoft sent us

http://ie.ign.com/videos/2014/10/07/assassins-creed-unity-phantom-blade-unboxing

IGN continues to be a joke.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Also of the three Assassin's Creed: Unity is the one with Microsoft co-marketing money...

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

 

[cb1115]

I'm pretty sure the PS4 version will run better than the Xbox One version, regardless of co-marketing money. Just makes sense based off of how the generation has gone so far.

everything's gonna be all right yo.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I'm pretty sure the PS4 version will run better than the Xbox One version, regardless of co-marketing money.

Going by the performance impressions from that preview event, that won't be all that hard.

 

[RE_Player]

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

They don't need to pay to reduce the quality of the Xbox One version. They already made the investment in better hardware. The benefits come naturally just as they did last generation for Microsoft with easier hardware and dev tools.

 

[Impeccable]

Well it's quite baseless considering that the only known parity clause from Microsoft is the one that states that indies have to release at the same time. Which is now done on a case by case basis and is apparently more lenient.

Parity clause for independant development which is lifting.
Sudden shift in marketing partners. With that will come some dicey language in how they share information about the game.
Sudden "change of vision" for the target renders.
Public relations guy spluttering out, "parity to avoid debates and stuff"

Listen, I've said it before in the thread... I don't think Microsoft or Ubisoft exchanged money for a forced parity. My "baseless speculation" is that the marketing agreement was so restrictive and carefully worded Ubisoft decided it was in their best interest to create parity to avoid accidentally breaching something in the contract.

I wouldn't have thought otherwise to any of this if it wasn't for "debates and stuff." I personally wouldn't have blinked twice at parity without that.

It's just sometimes ... things have a way of presenting themselves in a way it's hard to swallow.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I'm pretty sure the PS4 version will run better than the Xbox One version, regardless of co-marketing money. Just makes sense based off of how the generation has gone so far.

everything's gonna be all right yo.

That's actually the reason i'm getting the ps4 version, higher chance of a stable framerate.

 

[Windom Earle]

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

So Eden, what's your take on all of this? Are you fine with the parity?

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

It also wouldn't make any sense. Sony's console is KNOWN to be more powerful, so it's always going to win in the resolution war. However, the cries of the power gap closing from Microsoft never went away....

 

[xxracerxx]

XB1 footage.

Does the guy mention that or is that just based off the button prompts?

 

[artsi]

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

Well they wouldn't need to, PS4 is more powerful so the difference would be there anyway if they took all they can from the consoles.

It's not baseless considering all the points that have been made. Not confirmed, but not baseless either.

 

[RE_Player]

That's actually the reason i'm getting the ps4 version, higher chance of a stable framerate.

Exactly. It will come naturally.

I don't think Microsoft forced Ubisoft to bring the PlayStation 4 version down just perhaps they pushed them through their deal to have the Xbox One as the lead platform, leading to a spec lock the producer commented on.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Does the guy mention that or is that just based off the button prompts?

The version shown at the preview event was only the Xbox One version of the game

Here's a tidbit from a french preview of the game, i thought it was worth translating :



Translation
On the other side, what should we say about some bland textures or the one's that pop at the last second? The aliasing very present, framerate drops, sporadic but gigantic, collision bugs everywhere, lipsynch out of the place during cutscenes, invisible barriers or ledges, hero getting stuck in the setting? To all of that we'd like to simply answer : beta version. But a month and a half from the release, the pile of imperfections seems incrediby high ; all of this does not give us much faith.
more here (french)

welp.

I enjoyed my short time with Unity, and can’t wait to jump into its labyrinth of streets and stories. However, a cloud of doubt hangs over the game’s ability to run satisfactorily on the next-gen consoles. To go back to a previous paragraph, Assassin’s Creed: Unity is beautiful – when you’re standing still.

There’s still a bit of time to go, and the version we got our hands on could well be several revisions and optimisations old, but Unity’s performance issues are concerning. Targeting 900p and 30fps, it sports the same slightly vaselined look as its stable mate, Watch_Dogs, and gets very muddy and choppy in motion. The framerate behaves more erratically than an aristocrat during peasant uprising – obviously it depends on the scene, and the engine seemed to handle quieter streets and interiors without too many issues, but when trying to replicate moments from the trailers, perched up high, looking down on the crowd gathered at Notre Dame, the FPS took a nose dive into the low twenties. This happened a lot, especially during the kind of rooftop chases you can expect to be getting into pretty regularly. We were playing an Xbox One build, but were told that both console versions are the same.

http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/assassins_creed_unity/preview-3814.html

 

[xxracerxx]

The version shown at the preview event was only the Xbox One version of the game

http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/assassins_creed_unity/preview-3814.html

Thanks!

 

[razzraziel]

New interview with creative director of unity from Paris event:
5000+ ppl in one screen. There are also a few new gameplay scenes.

http://www.bolumsonucanavari.com/VideoIncelemeler-BSC_Ozel_Roportaj_Assassins_Creed_Unity-12676.htm

 

[ironcreed]

That's actually the reason i'm getting the ps4 version, higher chance of a stable framerate.

Yep, playing it on PS4 here as well. I'm sure it will be fine, as it already looks gorgeous on Xbox One. And chances are, it will probably run smoother and maybe even have better IQ on PS4.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Parity clause for independant development which is lifting.
Sudden shift in marketing partners. With that will come some dicey language in how they share information about the game.
Sudden "change of vision" for the target renders.
Public relations guy spluttering out, "parity to avoid debates and stuff"

"While under Sony's partnership, Ubisoft somehow wasn't able to get crossgen games to 1080p. That's quite odd. Must have been due to the contract that no one has seen being too carefully worded so Ubisoft decided to leave the xb1 version in the cold."
^ Just as baseless as what you just said. Also there's nothing sudden about the marketing partners being different. It's a by game basis. Watch Dogs, another 2014 game, had a sony partnership. And so is Far Cry 4. 3rd party companies switch marketing partners all the time.

 

[Westify]

I could just as easily say that Sony paid Ubisoft to reduce the resolution of the xb1 versions of the games while they were sponsoring Ubisoft, it would be just as baseless.

Although you are correct that there is no solid evidence of this yet Microsoft has been less than honest as of late with the whole Tomb Raider exclusivity fiasco where they had no problems claiming it would ONLY be on Xbox platforms until that matter was cleared up a week later.

Also it's no secret they aren't pleased with the resolution differences as they were apparently after Blizzard to bump the recent console version of Diablo3 to 1080p claiming that "900p is unacceptable".

Normally i would love to give them the benefit of the doubt but based on recent events it really would not surprise me if they had a hand in this.

 

[TriniTrin]

Well the N64 was more Powerful than the PS1

The OG Xbox was more powerful than the PS2

The PS3 was more powerful than the 360

I believe this is the first time both major systems are using the same x86 architecture. Doesn't that mean that they should be similar in how to develop for, but they obviously have different power grades for doing so.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Lets look at the facts:

Assassin's Creed 4
PS4 - 1080p, XB1 900p

WatchDogs
PS4 - 900p, XB1 - 792p

Assassin's Creed: Unity:
PS4 - 900p, XB1 - 900p

In terms of resolution, the PS4, on Ubisoft's engines, has been higher than the XB1's resolution. Now, a game that was targetting 1080p is now 900p on both. In addition, we have a rep saying the parity was CPU bound and to avoid debates. I am not buying they managed to get the XB1 to match the PS4 resolution on their engine, but not making any significant increase on the PS4 side.

An additional fact is that Xbox One opened up 10% more resources to developers this year. Since then a number of Xbox One games have upped resolution & matched PS4 resolution in the past couple of months. (Destiny, Diablo, etc.) Ubisoft wouldn't be the only company to see a benefit of Xbox One matching PS4 with games coming out recently. Also Assassin's Creed IV launched at sub-1080p on PS4 suggesting the only concrete pattern to discern here is that Ubisoft has trouble achieving 1080p with it's games on current gen consoles.

 

[Moon_frogger]

Oh wow, usually I find all the outrage on here about framerates and resolution to be tiresome and silly but this is unbelievable. He actually said that? 'To avoid debate'? That's incredible.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

An additional fact is that Xbox One opened up 10% more resources to developers this year. Since then a number of Xbox One games have upped resolution & matched PS4 resolution in the past couple of months. (Destiny, Diablo, etc.) Ubisoft wouldn't be the only company to see a benefit of Xbox One matching PS4 with games coming out recently. Also Assassin's Creed IV launched at sub-1080p on PS4 suggesting the only concrete pattern to discern here is that Ubisoft has trouble achieving 1080p with it's games on current gen consoles.

10% back doesn't make up the hardware deficit though. That's the problem.

 

[Westify]

An additional fact is that Xbox One opened up 10% more resources to developers this year. Since then a number of Xbox One games have upped resolution & matched PS4 resolution in the past couple of months. (Destiny, Diablo, etc.) Ubisoft wouldn't be the only company to see a benefit of Xbox One matching PS4 with games coming out recently. Also Assassin's Creed IV launched at sub-1080p on PS4 suggesting the only concrete pattern to discern here is that Ubisoft has trouble achieving 1080p with it's games on current gen consoles.

The "improvement" they made to the Xbox One version of Diablo 3 is somewhat subjective. They apparently traded 900p solid 60fps for 1080p with dips to 50fps.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...er&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialoomph

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

10% back doesn't make up the hardware deficit though. That's the problem.

I didn't say it makes up the hardware difference, but it does frequently make up the resolution difference in other games.

They couldn't achieve 1080p with Watch Dogs on PS4 and they struggled to reach it with AC4 which had to be patched. It's not a stretch to believe they can't achieve it with AC Unity which is also a big open world game.

 

[CLEEK]

An additional fact is that Xbox One opened up 10% more resources to developers this year. Since then a number of Xbox One games have upped resolution & matched PS4 resolution in the past couple of months. (Destiny, Diablo, etc.) Ubisoft wouldn't be the only company to see a benefit of Xbox One matching PS4 with games coming out recently.

Your logic doesn't check out.

If the removal of the 10% GPU Kinect allocation (which is 130 GFLOPS) is enough for games to jump up from 900p to 1080p, the 500 GFLOP extra GPU that the PS4 has over the Xbone should see 1080p being met with ease. If the issue was GPU FLOPS, then the PS4 and Xbone should never have parity as the gap is too big.

The fact is, GPU power is only one of the considerations for resolutions. The biggest bottleneck for resolution on the Xbone is the 32MB eSRAM. A bottleneck just not faced by the PS4.

I don't buy the claim that the AI is maxing out the CPU is the cause either. That doesn't hold up to technical realities.

 

[RE_Player]

"While under Sony's partnership, Ubisoft somehow wasn't able to get crossgen games to 1080p. That's quite odd. Must have been due to the contract that no one has seen being too carefully worded so Ubisoft decided to leave the xb1 version in the cold."
^ Just as baseless as what you just said. Also there's nothing sudden about the marketing partners being different. It's a by game basis. Watch Dogs, another 2014 game, had a sony partnership. And so is Far Cry 4. 3rd party companies switch marketing partners all the time.

You are always ignoring the quote in question regarding the spec lock. This thread didn't just pop out of thin air...

 

[RoboPlato]

One point that I haven't seen made yet about this issue is probably my biggest. This is the first next gen only multiplatform game. Forced parity here sets a precendent that will guide expectations going forward.

 

[xxracerxx]

I didn't say it makes up the hardware difference, but it does frequently make up the resolution difference in other games.

Two games does not spell out frequently. Give it some more time to actually gauge the usefulness of that 10% regarding resolution.

 

[TAJ]

10% back doesn't make up the hardware deficit though. That's the problem.

It actually just got us back to the basic hardware difference.
Look at the specs. That's the difference. It's just that the difference used to be bigger than the spec difference.

 

[Inertia Creeps]

Well, no ... no one has proof.

I wouldn't stretch to calling it baseless speculation, though either.

That's exactly what assumptions with literally zero evidence are though

 

[Patroclos]

I don't understand this, Ubisoft has been partnered with Sony for the past few years, with nearly every game getting exclusive content on the playstation console that sometimes never was put on xbox. Sony for once doesn't partner with them and suddenly they're sellouts? Or are you just doing the baseless specualtion that "M$ moneyhatted Ubisoft into parity" thing? ._.

That former close partnership with Sony regarding the series may be part of the reason for the vocal reaction to the parity admission. That's not my horse in this race however. My interest in the topic is parity and by extension any sort of deals/contracts relating to that.

I think the next couple of months will prove to be quite interesting when FC4 drops. It is the perfect type of game for a system showdown. PC, of course, is going to be amazing. The PS4 version should excel over the Xbox One version from what we know to date based on past games and performance.

Regarding FC4...
What if the differences are negligible?
What if FC4 is markedly better on PS4 what are we to assume?

Either result is not optimal from my point of view, one smacks of Ubi not trying or shooting for the lowest common denominator, the other seems to point troublesome, accusatory fingers straight at AC Unity and Ubi.

I would like to know others opinions on what FC4 will bring?

 

[cb1115]

New interview with creative director of unity from Paris event:
5000+ ppl in one screen. There are also a few new gameplay scenes.

http://www.bolumsonucanavari.com/VideoIncelemeler-BSC_Ozel_Roportaj_Assassins_Creed_Unity-12676.htm

the Brotherhood music in that video

 

[Crossing Eden]

So Eden, what's your take on all of this? Are you fine with the parity?

I generally don't care how xb1 gamers experience a game that I purchase on my ps4. When it comes to multiplats I care more about the gameplay than the visuals, I purchase multiplats specifically on ps4. You'll find that i'm more about the games than the consoles.

Spoiler

Although I am very glad to see that Unity has not been downgraded, mostly because everyone who said "don't believe the e3 demo, it's ubisoft, they lie!!1! Now has to eat crow.

Not to mention that this game, like the many others that have received this type of backlash, will most likely look and play better on ps4 anyway for obvious reasons.

 

[CLEEK]

I would like to know others opinions on what FC4 will bring?

Far Cry uses a different game engine from the AC games. It might be better suited to the Xbone's bottlenecks and limits, which would see both console versions similar. But being open world, I'd imagine it would thrive on the PS4 due to its RAM and GPU advantages.

I can't really see any game which would have technical reason why both console versions are the same. Parity would always been a publisher/political decision, not a technical one.

 

[ICPEE]

One point that I haven't seen made yet about this issue is probably my biggest. This is the first next gen only multiplatform game. Forced parity here sets a precendent that will guide expectations going forward.

Yep. I said this same shit in a previous post. This is going to cause other developers of mulitplatform games to do the same.

 

[Patroclos]

One point that I haven't seen made yet about this issue is probably my biggest. This is the first next gen only multiplatform game. Forced parity here sets a precendent that will guide expectations going forward.

Yep! That's why I think when FC4 drops we might be able to garner some insight as to the state of things.

 

[Crossing Eden]

You are always ignoring the quote in question regarding the spec lock. This thread didn't just pop out of thin air...

They backtracked and are still working on the game 24/7, pretty sure this game will not be exactly the same on both consoles.

 

[xxracerxx]

Although I am very glad to see that Unity has not been downgraded, mostly because everyone who said "don't believe the e3 demo, it's ubisoft, they lie!!1! Now has to eat crow.

I would say, let's wait until it is in consumer hands to actually say this.

 

[BruiserBear]

The "improvement" they made to the Xbox One version of Diablo 3 is somewhat subjective. They apparently traded 900p solid 60fps for 1080p with dips to 50fps.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...er&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialoomph

Sure, and any sane person would say it was the right call. The drops below 60 are rare.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I would like to know others opinions on what FC4 will bring?

UBI has already confirmed that the PS4 version of FC4 is 1080p. I don't think that they've said anything about the Xbox One version.

 

[MrDeeds]

I've been away for a couple days - can someone please summarize what the hell has been going on with this game's resolution?

Spoiler

7000+ posts would take awhile to read

 

[thelastcrusader]

UBI has already confirmed that the PS4 version of FC4 is 1080p. I don't think that they've said anything about the Xbox One version.

Isn't Far Cry technically open world? My God Ubisoft is full of shit.

 

[RE_Player]

Isn't Far Cry technically open world? My God Ubisoft is full of shit.

Far Cry 4 is a cross gen game though. I wouldn't be surprised if they hit 1080p on Xbox One too.

 

[BeforeU]

I've been away for a couple days - can someone please summarize what the hell has been going on with this game's resolution?

Spoiler

7000+ posts would take awhile to read

"This is bullshit and I am canceling my pre-order"
"The gap is closing"
"Ubi-shit, Microsoft paid for this" - some gifs
"Both MS and Ubisoft should be ashamed"
"Canceling my farcry and division pre-order as well"
"I am returning my Surface Pro 2 tomorrow" - yeah someone actually said this
"#PS4NOPARITY"
"then some PS4 vs Xbox One specs flying around"

 

[Crossing Eden]

Isn't Far Cry technically open world? My God Ubisoft is full of shit.

Far Cry 4's world is no where near as complex or technically demanding as Unity for obvious reasons. And like others have mentioned, it's a cross gen game.

 

[CLEEK]

I've been away for a couple days - can someone please summarize what the hell has been going on with this game's resolution?

1. Senior Ubi dev said that they were forcing parity at 900p/30 to prevent debates and shit.

2. Ubi publish PR statement saying his comments had been misinterpreted, but don't deny that they're forcing parity.

3. Ubi then make the backtracking comment that resolutions haven't been finalised.

As it stands, both console versions are 900p/30, with the vague possibility this can change.

 

[Xando]

I generally don't care how xb1 gamers experience a game that I purchase on my ps4. When it comes to multiplats I care more about the gameplay than the visuals, I purchase multiplats specifically on ps4. You'll find that i'm more about the games than the consoles.

Spoiler

Although I am very glad to see that Unity has not been downgraded, mostly because everyone who said "don't believe the e3 demo, it's ubisoft, they lie!!1! Now has to eat crow.

Not to mention that this game, like the many others that have received this type of backlash, will most likely look and play better on ps4 anyway for obvious reasons.

I couldnt care less what the xb1 resolution is aswell, whats bothering me is that a developer came out and said they locked both versions to avoid discussions.
That sounds like they went with the best technical specs the XB could get. So why didnt they bother to optimize the PS4 (and PC) version to be the best they can? Is my money less worthy than the money i would pay for a XB copy? I don't want them to cripple the XB version, i want them to do the best they can to optimize each version and not go for a target and then stop.
If they start going for the lowest commom ground EA will follow then Activision and all other publishers. They should try to push the hardware as hard as they can no matter what plattform it is.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I couldnt care less what the xb1 resolution is aswell, whats bothering me is that a developer came out and said they locked both versions to avoid discussions.
That sounds like they went with the best technical specs the XB could get. So why didnt they bother to optimize the PS4 (and PC) version to be the best they can? Is my money less worthy than the money i would pay for a XB copy? I don't want them to cripple the XB version, i want them to do the best they can to optimize each version and not go for a target and then stop.

And according to their latest statement that's exactly what they're doing. Why're people suddenly forgetting about all the other games that've received this kinda backlash yet ran and looked better on ps4 anyway?