-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
MS not mandating any framerate or fidelity requirements on Scorpio including in MP
- Thread starter Kayant
- Start date
It means a multiplayer game could run 60fps with better draw distance on Scorpio for example.
Well who is gonna wanna play a competitive 30fps MP FPS on X1 when your gonna get matched up against 60fps Scorpio players?
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Most players?
Multiplayer games are never going to be 30fps on base 60fps on the upgraded consoles. No dev would want that kind of unfair split of their player base, and limiting the Scorpio/Pro players to playing against each other would be dumb.
So even if they're letting devs choose, devs will only choose one way anyway.
No, the disparity is too big. I guarantee you devs won't choose to do this, at least not as the standard.
So even if they're letting devs choose, devs will only choose one way anyway.
No, the disparity is too big. I guarantee you devs won't choose to do this, at least not as the standard.
The biggest MP shooters(Halo, Overwatch, COD, Battlefield etc) are already 60fps(or at the very least target it) on XB1, so it really isn't a big deal for those games.
Destiny 2 is the odd man out in this regard.
Who is going to know? As stated time and time again in this thread parity is a myth.
If you want an edge buy the best of everything from console to controller...
jmaine_ph
Member
Very interesting point here. Does this mean it is on a developer by developer case as well for FPS?
He's saying that devs aren't required to limit framerate to match the og Xbox.
Also MS is hoping devs program their games with dynamic res and unlocked framerate, so outside of the need for higher res assets, scorpio benefits will be "free".
I mean, most games are multiplat with PC ports. This means the engine is already scalable in terms of framerate, resolution, and high-res assets.
So, It's not really a matter of spending extra time and money making a better version. the better version already exists. It's a matter of designing the base console version so that it's dynamic and can take advantage of the advanced hardware options.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
I don't see why not. Most gamers won't be aware, much less care about it.
Also, has this ever been tested and proven to be a substantial benefit to the 60fps player?
I can't believe it would be any more of a benefit than a better controller or a bigger TV with a higher resolution. At least not to the vast vast majority of gamers.
It is a benefit to the 60fps player. But it's only one of a multitude of disparities that exist in online gaming. People have been playing at different framerates in PC forever, and ultimately it's a wash.
Once people come to grips with the fact that "competition" is only truly level on LAN, they can allow themselves to enjoy playing online despite the disparities.
In console, I'd say having a better controller is pretty comparable in an FPS.
No it's not stupid to mandate that 3 or 4 year old consoles are still supported. Doing the opposite would be a good way to damage the good will you have with owners of OG systems, lessening the chance they'll stick with you long enough to upgrade to the refresh or next gen console. As we've seen with the low end XBO version to the high end PC version of games, both ends of the hardware spectrum can be properly supported at the same time.
Also you completely missed my point with the 970. The market already dictates lower end hardware is supported even if a company, like Valve, does not make it mandatory.
Where I'm confused on is if a developer will drop the resolution to 900p to hit a solid framerate, why would this same developer not drop to sub-4K resolutions on the Scorpio as well to hit those same solid framerates? If they show a priority for consistent performance on one platform, they are very likely to show the same on another. If a 4K output was that important to them, they could then rely on some kind of checkerboard or upscaling technique.
At the end of the day, the onus is on the dev to make a game that works well. If that means 900p on Xbox one so be it. If that means checkerboard instead of native 4K on scorpio, so be it.
There's no scenario where poor performance on Scorpio is a function of the hardware being better. The end result is all totally up to the dev.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
Won't this mean that many games won't end being better than the PS4 Pro versions due to install base and cost of further optimization?
The 60fps benefit is obvious, it doesn't need testing or proving.
Because it's a huge disparity and would have a backlash from the core community who are inherent to building a successful franchise. They're the ones who praise and critique the loudest, they register on forums to discuss and feedback, they put videos on YT, they rally the troops for the positive and negative.
They will not do something that so drastically shifts the fairness of online play.
MS is banking on the idea that the rise of dynamic res solutions, unlocked framerates, and 4K assets for PC versions will minimize the cost of optimization for Scorpio.
People playing on base consoles would never notice, and few would care.
Those expecting the highest competition also have crazy internet, $200 controllers, and play on low latency monitors.
geordiemp
Member
You really think this ? Why do you think COD sells 20 million every single year ?
60 FPS instant control fast gameplay is recognised by the market.
If COD went 30 FPS it would die instantly.
It doesn't matter what average jane thinks, unless your game is already CoD level you need to appease the core fanbase who will build your online community for you.
A disparity like 30/60 between players of the same competitive game would be too huge, the backlash would be insane. Plus I don't think many devs would support that kind of unfair advantage anyway.
dr_rus
Member
It's the general audience that builds the online communities, not really the small group of core gamers you see on forums like GAF. These people may be able to feel the difference in 60fps, but they don't understand that the difference in controller response is related to the frame rate.
They know games like CoD feel good to play but they don't know know or care why.
The average Jane is the audience that builds the community.
The idea that devs won't support this "unfair" advantage goes out the window when the PC version does it.
The backlash would be insane for like 2 minutes, until people go back to judging the game on how much fun they are having, not speculating about what framerate their enemy may be (but probably isn't) playing at.
Any competive scene is going to be playing on the best settings anyway.
The backlash would be small if any. People who care are gonna buy the Scorpio anyway.
And unless they tell you, how would you even know?
dragonelite
Member
Phatosaurus
Member
You could same the same about people playing with a mouse and keyboard on consoles, however people sure do throw a hissy fit over that.
The backlash would be huge from the core community. And we've seen how this kind of backlash has affected devs to the point they go back and change their game, or make the next game different based on this backlash.
I mean, this is proven with history.
What PC FPS is cross play with consoles that run the same game locked at 30fps?
PC players have the option to turn down graphical settings to reach 60fps, so your comparison isn't valid at all.
The rest of our post I disagree with entirely and my previous posts explain why, we'd be going in circles if we carried on there.
Don't you think the core community who cares about that are gonna buy the Scorpio anyway?
Was their a backlash about the Elite Controllers?
Sure, but many of these people actually care about the state of the game overall, not just their individual experiences. This is again proven with how great so many core community member have been with their reviews and critiques and feedback and praise in games over the years.
And how would the state of the game change? People who care about what the game looks like and how it preforms will get the best possible product to play it.
I'd think more would be pissed if it wasn't 60fps when it could be.
Because their would be a huge and unfair disparity, and plenty of people actually care about the overall player experience and not just those who can afford the upgrade.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
So the pro uses one core or something?...
LukasTaves
Member
PackAPunchedMick
Member
Yep. From the off all games should be native 4k, if not, well, ms got some explaining to do.
I'm not saying it's going to happen, I'm just saying ms won't stop devs from implementing something likes that.
PackAPunchedMick
Member
As stated in this thread, it'll be exactly the same as Sony's policy. "Do whatever the fuck you want".
As seen with battleborn, 30fps on og, 60fps on pro, yet horizon zero dawn is 30fps on both.
Sure, but hardly any dev will choose to do it either.
Zambayoshi
Member
Seems reasonable. Probably some other graphical differences as well, but as far as resolution and frame rate go, I think this is pretty much on the money.
Not really, as long as they have a good library of 4K games. They can't avoid some games not being 4K, especially from launch.
You are just creating an unrealistic scenario where the Scorpio will fail in your mind. I bet you are already ready to shit on Scorpio when the first non 4K game is released.
Not sure what you mean here could you rephrase that(My brain may not be working well right now xD).
As per my OP update this mandate never actually existed and comes from an off hand comment from a ND Dev from the PS Pro reveal which Videogamer provides no context for the question asked none is something that existed in Dev docs like that ones leaked or seen by Eurogamer or official stance said by Sony unless I missed a source somewhere.
Prototype Viktor
Member
I dunno the last thing about indie devs and a bunch of devs on GAF trying to talk around NDA's
Not valid? There are tons of disparity between pc gamers including Framerate . Some people CHOOSE to play a lower framerates because their hardware is weaker. This is no different.
Turning your graphics down is just trading one disparity for another. The player with the better hardware still had a performance advantage.
The game doesn't have to xplay with consoles to prove the point. Pc players play FPS online, with thousands of different configurations. Some even use controllers.
No, it's not valid because the PC gives the option to cultivate your own experience in terms of the visual performance ratio.
Console, outside of a few mostly very basic examples, does not.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I did not say it would happen because Scorpio is stronger than Xbox One, that would be a strange reason. Of course it would be the developer's fault, but if Mcirosoft mandated better or equal performance on Scorpio over Xbox One, such a thing would be ruled out. As it stands, it isn't.
oneils
Member
Ok, but that takes time and money - right?
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
It's amazing how wrong you are. This will be proven in time. When Scorpio launches I will go back and quote your posts as points of reference for how ridiculously erroneous your take on this was.
Scorpio finally brings the beauty of hardware superiority to console gaming and it's going to be amazing. Pro should do the same. Forced parity bullshit rules are ridiculous.
Good Day.
So you Think Scorpio will run D2 at 60fps.?
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
I agree but what about the games that already offer high res/30 mode and 1080/60 mode? Why can't that become a standard on both Pro and Scorpio for both SP and MP, giving the option to go either way?
Maybe I am missing the point of the discussion though. I agree that native 4k/60 is a pipe-dream on new AAA games until next gen.