It's not a bold claim at all. A precedent has already been set, with recent ubi games like AC4, FC3. Or even with most big multiplatform titles the standard difference will always be resolution and performance with a few setting options like AA and AO.
Orange and pulsing. Not that shade of yellow.
FC3, Ghost Recon, AC IV...
I doubt it was running live, but my point still stand valid. Nobody knew what the DS4's colors meant back then and even now a casual would probably put one and one together and think there's a PS4 controller so it has to be running on a PS4 without noticing/thinking too much about the yellow lightbar.
When I played it on my High-End 2010 build (only upgraded SSD and GTX 560 Ti since then) some time after its release it would always produce the same texture bug after about 2 hours of playing. It also coudn't hold 60's while BF3 and other thereotically more demanding games didn't struggle with it. But that's just my experience.
I've seen better graphics than that running real time on a PC, so it's not impossible.
I like how these early reveals almost always have to show the devs or presenter using a controller, zoomed in all the way to their hands just to make you believe that everything was realtime.
The default color for the the DS4 when plugged into a PC is Yellow.
Like? If you're only talking about one aspect like textures or framerate or whatever then maybe yes, I could probably name a game or 2 as well. But as a whole package, The Division looked pretty amazing.
I wasn't talking about the graphics. I mean as a demo, it was flawless. I think it was footage of a realtime playthrough (from a PC no doubt, and heavily scripted) that the guy was pretending to play live.
The default color for the the DS4 when plugged into a PC is Yellow.
Yeah the guy's aim with the controller was flawless. There was no signs of getting oriented to targets. It was always first shot right where it should be. When the enemy ducked behind the police car the shooting still looked too perfect when he sprayed across the vehicle.
Wait, really, The Division? I just thought they had recorded that gameplay previously with the actors talking and all that fuss. So it was a demo with live acting?
Although I'm reserving 1% for wishful thinking, I honestly do not and I've been saying this repeatedly since its reveal.
They were trying to show that it was running on PS4, which is great, because now they have their work cut out to make that a reality. They've set the bar extremely high. There will certainly be a backlash if they don't achieve it, but it might end up being a more impressive game than if they'd set the bar more realistically.
Are you talking about the Division? Because I'm not convinced that was actual gameplay (as much as I wish it was, don't get me wrong). I think what Ubi has been doing at E3 these last couple of years is rendering up something that looks like gameplay, maybe even in-engine (at settings the real game will never achieve, at 1-2 fps and stitched together later), and then they have a guy on stage waggling a controller to the beat and pretending he's playing the game. The movement was just too perfect.
AC4 isn't part of this discussion, because Ubisoft never tried to bullshit us as to what we'd be getting in the next-gen version.
No, as I said in the opening sentence, I do not believe the Division was actual gameplay. I believe exactly what you do in regards to Ubi's E3 tricks.
Indeed, that was the biggest giveaway.
