Support NeoGAF

[Blanquito]

Not the PS2's power, the 360's. Even though the 360 was easier to develop for and PC ports were really easy from that machine, quite a few devs kept releasing PC versions based on the PS2 game. It would make no sense to do that unless they believed that the audience didn't have the hardware to run a 360 port.

Ah, I didn't understand that's what you were saying. Carry on!

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

Those games run on 2006 hardware because they are cross gen. Do you honestly believe there was any point during the development of the game when someone from the dev team said "people we need to limit the scope of our game because it won't run on a gt430"?

Do you honestly believe there is no consideration at all when it comes to system requirements when you develop a PC game? Developers try to make their games run on as many machines as possible and there are a considerable amount of people playing on not so great gaming PCs and notebooks.

Gaming forums aren't a good representation of the actual market. If they were, software sales would be absolutely insane.

Alien Isolation runs better on a $80 GPU than a PS4, so you're lucky they didn't aim any higher.

PC is my main gaming system.

 

[zou]

Iris Pro is a weak GPU compared to what is in PS4 or Xbox One. The CPU would not make up the difference so the overall console is weaker

actually no, iris pro has far better performance. both console's are based on amd's tablet chips, so not surprisingly the system including gpu is quite weak.

 

[Brad Grenz]

actually no, iris pro has far better performance. both console's are based on amd's tablet chips, so not surprisingly the system including gpu is quite weak.

That is not remotely true.

 

[CLEEK]

actually no, iris pro has far better performance. both console's are based on amd's tablet chips, so not surprisingly the system including gpu is quite weak.

Wrong on both accounts. The Iris Pro range maxes out at 832 GFLOPS, half that of the PS4's GPU.

The GPUs in the PS4/BX1 use the exact same GCN architecture as the AMD desktop and mobile (laptop, not tablet) Radeons. Clock speed, wattage, number of CUs place the PS4's GPU closest to the 7970M.

 

[alexandros]

Do you honestly believe there is no consideration at all when it comes to system requirements when you develop a PC game?

Of course there is, I literally just said that developers were releasing PS2 versions on PC 2-3 years into the previous generation because they believed not many people could run 360 ports. Noone is releasing 360 ports on PC now, they are all the next gen versions. A very clear sign that devs believe most of their PC audience has at least current gen level of power available.

 

[Marlenus]

Of course there is, I literally just said that developers were releasing PS2 versions on PC 2-3 years into the previous generation because they believed not many people could run 360 ports. Noone is releasing 360 ports on PC now, they are all the next gen versions. A very clear sign that devs believe most of their PC audience has at least current gen level of power available.

Unless you are exclusively talking about EA sports games then this is not at all true. In 2006 Oblivion, Hitman BM, TR:L, Prey, Just Cause etc all released on both 360 and PC and in all cases the PC version on the highest settings looked better than the 360 version. Even the Doom 3 360 port looked worse than its PC counterpart and that was from 2004. The gap grew a huge amount with the release of the 8800GTX which was twice as fast as the outgoing 7900 series but that was already faster than the Xenos GPU.

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

Of course there is, I literally just said that developers were releasing PS2 versions on PC 2-3 years into the previous generation because they believed not many people could run 360 ports. Noone is releasing 360 ports on PC now, they are all the next gen versions. A very clear sign that devs believe most of their PC audience has at least current gen level of power available.

2-3 years into the previous generation is late 2007 to late 2008. Any developer that released a PC game based on the PS2 version (the two of them) didn't do it for performance reasons, just like the current cross-gen games or Gun on the original 360. I only see evidence of a stronger focus on multiplatform development and Steam's impact on the PC market, so let's go back to your original statements:

Windows PCs in general are an irrelevant metric when we're talking about PC gaming. Even the Steam hardware survey that some people like to bring up from time to time is massively skewed by the fact that a lot of people who participate in it are from very poor countries.

Saying that people with weaker PCs are "massively skewing" the hardware statistics is like saying people without a job are "massively skewing" the unemployment ratio. It creates an inaccurate picture of the market by ignoring data you don't like.

I never said that. But it is a simple fact that moms playing Sims and people buying the odd indie game to play on their laptops are an audience that is neither particularly relevant nor directly comparable to the core gaming market.

There are plenty of people playing those 'core' games with weak or old gaming PCs/laptops. If that wasn't the case, developers wouldn't take them into account while designing their game. What would be the point?

 

[Dictator93]

2-3 years into the previous generation is late 2007 to late 2008. Any developer that released a PC game based on the PS2 version (the two of them) didn't do it for performance reasons, just like the current cross-gen games or Gun on the original 360. I only see evidence of a stronger focus on multiplatform development and Steam's impact on the PC market, so let's go back to your original statements:


Saying that people with weaker PCs are "massively skewing" the hardware statistics is like saying people without a job are "massively skewing" the unemployment ratio. It creates an inaccurate picture of the market by ignoring data you don't like.

There are plenty of people playing those 'core' games with weak or old gaming PCs/laptops. If that wasn't the case, developers wouldn't take them into account while designing their game. What would be the point?

Do people with shit PCs actually buy AAA stuff with high end recommended requirements? I wonder.

 

[Vizzeh]

There are plenty of people playing those 'core' games with weak or old gaming PCs/laptops. If that wasn't the case, developers wouldn't take them into account while designing their game. What would be the point?

For sure, on the flip side though, you only need to check out the AC PC requirement page to see the conniptions going on about the minimum Spec's, its pretty high end. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Ubi are just brute forcing with their engine instead of optimizing! They don't exactly seem to be doing much of that on the PS4 version either!

 

[alexandros]

2-3 years into the previous generation is late 2007 to late 2008. Any developer that released a PC game based on the PS2 version (the two of them) didn't do it for performance reasons

Why, then?

 

[Souldestroyer Reborn]

Strange about the CPU.

Admittedly I've not read through the whole thread yet however even though the Xbox CPU had an upgrade to its clocks I distinctly remember reading a post on this board from Matt stating that you could do so much more with the PS4 CPU.

Anyone mind enlightening me?

 

[stryke]

Strange about the CPU.

Admittedly I've not read through the whole thread yet however even though the Xbox CPU had an upgrade to its clocks I distinctly remember reading a post on this board from Matt stating that you could do so much more with the PS4 CPU.

Anyone mind enlightening me?

June sdk update

 

[Vizzeh]

Strange about the CPU.

Admittedly I've not read through the whole thread yet however even though the Xbox CPU had an upgrade to its clocks I distinctly remember reading a post on this board from Matt stating that you could do so much more with the PS4 CPU.

Anyone mind enlightening me?

Its basically resource management, Ps4 has the majority if not all its CPU reserved for gaming, it has a built in ARM processor with its own dedicated ram as well as other goodies to ensure the most of its power can go to games.

X1 even with its high clock has to worry about snap features + kinect whilst not having as many extra power enhancers. giving less power available to games.

So if what matt is saying is 100% then PS4 game pool resources versus X1's = More available gaming power. (unless the update Tipped the balance to X1)

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

Do people with shit PCs actually buy AAA stuff with high end recommended requirements? I wonder.

People will play on whatever they have as long as it runs the game ime, even if they have to lower a few graphical settings.

For sure, on the flip side though, you only need to check out the AC PC requirement page to see the conniptions going on about the minimum Spec's, its pretty high end. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Ubi are just brute forcing with their engine instead of optimizing! They don't exactly seem to be doing much of that on the PS4 version either!

I've seen that, but neither the PS4 nor the XBOne have anything anywhere near a 2500K and a GTX 680. If the game can't even run on anything lower than that, it wouldn't run at all on either console, so I'll wait for actual benchmarks (and wonder wth is wrong with Ubi if those requirements are even remotely accurate).

Why, then?

For the same reason we have cross-gen games or PES 2015 uses an older engine on PC: money.

 

[RoboPlato]

Strange about the CPU.

Admittedly I've not read through the whole thread yet however even though the Xbox CPU had an upgrade to its clocks I distinctly remember reading a post on this board from Matt stating that you could do so much more with the PS4 CPU.

Anyone mind enlightening me?

Matt's post was about a year ago and the Xbox One has had more SDK updates than the PS4. It's likely it was throttled by the OS reserve last year and has improved since then.