Support NeoGAF

[Seanspeed]

It's funny because they did.


"CD Projekt are trying to deliver the same experience across the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. Despite their similarities, the PS4 and Xbox One do have some decidedly unique hardware features.

How will CD Projek be taking advantage of the PS4′s unified GDDR5 memory architecture and whether they will be developing specific graphical features which they might have found to be possible only on the PS4?"

"We always want to provide the best possible experience to all our gamers regardless of the platform and so we are not aiming to develop special graphical features for any of them"

Equality, parity, call it what you want... It is as clear as day.

If I give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were only referring to graphical effects and weren't at all trying to imply overall parity, I think you should at least know very well that when most people here say 'parity', they mean complete equality in pretty much all measures. So maybe your intentions weren't what people are thinking and the title change is slightly unfair, but I think you do share some blame for not making it a bit more clear that we weren't talking about overall parity, just on specific graphic effects.

Always know people will overreact when it comes to controversial topics like 'parity' and be very clear what you're talking about in order to squash as much of that as possible. This thread became embarrassing very quickly.

 

[Kezen]

We always want to provide the best possible experience to all our gamers regardless of the platform and so we are not aiming to develop special graphical features for any of them
Read more at http://gamingbolt.com/witcher-3-wil...ill-not-use-hardware-msaa#ARe0vWt5z2SDESdT.99

What about the ultra settings on PC then ? They already confirmed there will be some pretty impressive tessellation, post-processing and GPU Physx effects.

 

[intheinbetween]

That's why i wrote 'little' difference in res and fps. You're the only one in this thread who over analyzes peoples expectations and translates them into numbers such as 200% more powerful. I am quite sure that the people in here are aware of the fact that the PS4 does not offer double or even +half the XBoxOne's processing power.

am I the only one? don't really think so, anyway, just take a look at how many people complained about the OP, the parity, claiming PS4 is SO superior than XB1. I'm sure most them wouldn't complain that much if the really believe the power gap wasn't that big

 

[Crossing Eden]

So "special graphical features" does not equal "resolution, texture quality, frame rate, effects"?

So what exactly are "special graphical features"?

This imo would is a special graphical feature. https://twitter.com/HIDEO_KOJIMA_EN/status/436014959621718016
A more solid framerate+ slightly higher resolution=something that shouldn't be surprising or noted as "special." Amazing thread title change btw.

 

[akachan ningen]

So they are holding back the PS4 version just so that some fanboys won't whine when the comparison videos come out?

Preorder canceled.

 

[Amir0x]

So they are holding back the PS4 version just so that some fanboys won't whine when the comparison videos come out?

Preorder canceled.

They are not. The title has been clarified for us.

Witcher 3 devs do not call things like AA, resolution, textures, etc as "special graphical effects", so those are the areas in which we can expect a gap.

 

[KKRT00]

So "special graphical features" does not equal "resolution, texture quality, frame rate, effects"?

So what exactly are "special graphical features"?

For example different kind of depth of field. Lets say PC and Xbox One has normal depth of field, but for PS4 they are developing bokeh depth of field.
Different physics engine for water.
Particle lighting only on PS4 and not on other platforms.
Different type of AA.
etc.

IQ changes like resolution, higher quality of post-processing [more taps], AF changes, or framerate are just toggles in an engine, not developed features.
They do not have to develop anything to change them, they just change values in variables and its working.

 

[FF Seraphim]

LOL wow that thread title.

But I have to admit, if they were intentionally holding back the PS4 version to match the XB1 version I would be pissed... if I wasn't using it as a reason to upgrade my GPU on my PC anyway...

 

[Amir0x]

What about the ultra settings on PC then ? They already confirmed there will be some pretty impressive tessellation, post-processing and GPU Physx effects.

I'm probably going to have to upgrade my CPU and GPU again. I need to get close to maxing this shit. It'll probably melt my mind. I can run most modern games with most effects on at close to 60fps or above, but I know Witcher 3 ain't having none of that shit.

 

[Seanspeed]

What about the ultra settings on PC then ? They already confirmed there will be some pretty impressive tessellation, post-processing and GPU Physx effects.

Yea, I'm thinking they will still get caught out for bullshit PR for this eventually. Maybe these effects will be equal between PS4 and XB1 but I'm betting that PC *will* get some special features, or at least higher quality settings for these features(low[console equivalent], medium and high PhysX options for example).

 

[GrizzleBoy]

I just didn't want to get into list wars. Do you really want me to list all the endless indies that are on PC and PS4 both? Do you really want me to list all the multiplatform games that are superior on PS4 than XBO (note: it's nearly all of them)? If you want me to, I will.

Nobody on neoGAF who knows me doubts my ability to source my points. I am a prolific at finding mountains of links to substantiate my claims. I've just been doing it in the Rise of Tomb Raider topic.

So it's up to you. If you want me to do that, I will. i suspect nobody wants me to do that though. I'm leaving it in your hands to decide. >

What he was getting at, was the fact that although I dismantled your argument of why CDP is 'bad' for creating this 'parity', with the ENTIRITY of my post, you chose to cherry pick specific weak links that you could attack, instead of addressing the main point of my post.

That point being that this threads title and OP were specially engineered bullwhip to make people such as yourself start talking shit about CDP for no reason whatsoever and the mod(s) agree.

 

[Vestax]

This imo would is a special graphical feature. https://twitter.com/HIDEO_KOJIMA_EN/status/436014959621718016
A more solid framerate+ slightly higher resolution=something that shouldn't be surprising or noted as "special." Amazing thread title change btw.

For example different kind of depth of field. Lets say PC and Xbox One has normal depth of field, but for PS4 they are developing bokeh depth of field.
Different physics engine for water.
Particle lighting only on PS4 and not on other platforms.
Different type of AA.
etc.

IQ changes are like resolution, higher quality of post-processing [more taps], AF changes, or framerate. Are just toggles in an engine, not developed features.

Hmm, I see...good info. Thanks.

 

[Kezen]

I'm probably going to have to upgrade my CPU and GPU again. I need to get close to maxing this shit. It'll probably melt my mind. I can run most modern games with most effects on at close to 60fps or above, but I know Witcher 3 ain't having none of that shit.

Yea, I'm thinking they will still get caught out for bullshit PR for this eventually. Maybe these effects will be equal between PS4 and XB1 but I'm betting that PC *will* get some special features, or at least higher quality settings for these features(low, medium, high PhysX for example).

I know this is PR but there must be some other way to phrase it.

If you're interested in Nvidia and CDProjekt's collaboration on TW3 :

Amongst those enhancements is the latest iteration of NVIDIA HairWorks, part of the wider NVIDIA GameWorks family, which provides developers with powerful, advanced graphics technologies that can be quickly and easily implemented into their titles. In Witcher 3, HairWorks adds realistic hair to Geralt and other characters, and adds coats of thick, dynamic fur to the many interesting monsters that inhabit the Witcher’s world.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-demonstrates-witcher-3-hair-works-talks-hair-simulation-nextgen-flex-physx-turbulence-particles/

This is going to going to be very taxing, legitimately so.

 

[Amir0x]

What he was getting at, was the fact that although I dismantled your argument of why CDP is 'bad' for creating this 'parity', with the ENTIRITY of my post, you chose to cherry pick specific weak links that you could attack, instead of addressing the main point of my post.

That point being that this threads title and OP were specially engineered bullwhip to make people such as yourself start talking shit about CDP for no reason whatsoever and the mod(s) agree.

I don't know why you got banned, but it wasn't that. I was going through your questions point by point but as I got further into your post it legitimately seemed like you were trying to troll me, since so many of those questions didn't even make sense. Like there are so many PC to PS4 indie games that many posters on NeoGAF criticize Sony for it. And you can basically just list all multiplatform games and point to them all and only like one or two will not be superior on PS4.

After that point, I must admit it is a little hard to take future elements seriously.

 

[Windom Earle]

They are clearly too busy to not provide parity in the physical content of the limited edition.

 

[Kamina]

am I the only one? don't really think so, anyway, just take a look at how many people complained about the OP, the parity, claiming PS4 is SO superior than XB1. I'm sure most them wouldn't complain that much if the really believe the power gap wasn't that big

But nowhere do they write how much better they expect the PS4 version to be. You can't really translate that to numbers.
I choose to believe that most people are well aware of what they can expect.

 

[Durante]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

 

[Amir0x]

I know this is PR but there must be some other way to phrase it.

If you're interested in Nvidia and CDProjekt's collaboration on TW3 :

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-demonstrates-witcher-3-hair-works-talks-hair-simulation-nextgen-flex-physx-turbulence-particles/

This is going to going to be very taxing, legitimately so.

"HairWorks"? Is that like Nvidia/Witcher devs version of TressFX? Is that where the weird L'Oreal Wolf comes from?

I need to see what their recommendations are for max effects at a 60fps rate. I'll probably cry myself to sleep when I read it but I must know!

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

So "special graphical features" does not equal "resolution, texture quality, frame rate, effects"?

So what exactly are "special graphical features"?

Stuff like TXAA and HBAO+ we see sometimes only on Nvidia cards.
Its effects specifically developed for a certain hardware.

 

[KKRT00]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Please stop Durante, You will gonna hurt some people

 

[Krappadizzle]

"HairWorks"? Is that like Nvidia/Witcher devs version of TressFX? Is that where the weird L'Oreal Wolf comes from?

I need to see what their recommendations are for max effects at a 60fps rate. I'll probably cry myself to sleep when I read it but I must know!

We won't get those Specs for a few months I'd imagine. Hopefully the game is optimized well so that you can push effects without a major hit to framerate. W2 ran pretty well as long as you never used UberSampling.

 

[Sentenza]

My memory is a bit fuzzy about this topic, so I often find myself wondering if "disgusting platform parity" was perceived as much as a crime when PS2 used to be the most popular (and arguably also the weakest) of all consoles on the market during its generation.

Also, making use of all that GDDR5 is apparently still perceived as a potential gateway to some fucking sort of magic and a pretty damn big deal, for some reason.

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Preposterous!

 

[tuna_love]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Be prepared for a walk of text.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

Also, making use of all that GDDR5 is apparently still perceived as a potential gateway to some fucking sort of magic and a pretty damn big deal, for some reason.

Probably because of the Uncharted 4 teaser that just looked much better than everything else we've seen and still ran at 1080p and 60FPS.
It must come from somewhere.

Spoiler

I don't think its has much to do with the GDDR5. It comes down to the GPU and making intelligent use of compute units.

 

[Sentenza]

I don't think its has much to do with the GDDR5.

So why are you using it as a pertinent answer, if you understand it isn't?

 

[kitch9]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Indeed, just how many can be done at the same time..

 

[Zarx]

It's funny because they did.


"CD Projekt are trying to deliver the same experience across the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. Despite their similarities, the PS4 and Xbox One do have some decidedly unique hardware features.

How will CD Projek be taking advantage of the PS4′s unified GDDR5 memory architecture and whether they will be developing specific graphical features which they might have found to be possible only on the PS4?"

"We always want to provide the best possible experience to all our gamers regardless of the platform and so we are not aiming to develop special graphical features for any of them"

Equality, parity, call it what you want... It is as clear as day.

I hope you realize that the article only has two out of context quotes from CDPR

“We always want to provide the best possible experience to all our gamers regardless of the platform and so we are not aiming to develop special graphical features for any of them,”

and

“We are still exploring some options regarding anti-aliasing but we are sure that it will be some kind of screen space anti-aliasing solution and not hardware MSAA,”

Everything else in the article is inferred by the writer of the article, and as such can't be considered a statement from CDPR. Without the context these statements really don't convey the message that the rest of the article does. GamingBolt are known too make click bait articles out of quotes taken out of context.

 

[Amir0x]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Obviously!

The question only is how much easier is it to get a "special graphical effect" running in an engine on PS4, versus the types of trade-offs you might need to make on a system that has less power under the hood.

Anyway, you are the king of special graphical effects, you fixed Dark Souls. ;P

 

[mclem]

Later on this page we found out the Witcher 3 devs don't classify AA, resolution, textures under 'special effects', which nobody had any way to tell from the original comments. So, going under the original premise, the conversation that played out in this topic was appropriate and nobody was overreacting.

Maybe it's because I've done games developing (in an instance where the original Xbox was the superior product gaining bonusses over the PS2 version), but I absolutely took the initial statement to that they would still do what I called at the time "Just cranking up the numbers". Where a texture was capped at 256x256 on PS2, on the Xbox I'd cap it at 512x512 instead. I absolutely would not regard that as a 'special effect' (later I rewrote the environment renderer to favour the Xbox, which I absolutely *would* have regarded as such).

So I found the original post clear and unambiguous, but that might just stem from more experience.

 

[Kezen]

"HairWorks"? Is that like Nvidia/Witcher devs version of TressFX? Is that where the weird L'Oreal Wolf comes from?

I need to see what their recommendations are for max effects at a 60fps rate. I'll probably cry myself to sleep when I read it but I must know!

Yes, Hairworks is Nvidia's module for hair and fur simulation, it was first used in COD Ghosts.
The Gamescom gameplay of The Witcher 3 showed it at some point. Impressive effect for sure.

 

[Fuz]

I think I'm going to blow some minds here: there are no "special graphical features" PS4 can do that XB1 can't.

Uh... then why that statement? It's even more confusing.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Yes, Hairworks is Nvidia's module for hair and fur simulation, it was first used in COD Ghosts.
The Gamescom gameplay of The Witcher 3 showed it at some point. Impressive effect for sure.

Wasn't the gamescom gameplay of the xb1 version? Or was there also a pc demonstration?

 

[Amir0x]

Maybe it's because I've done games developing (in an instance where the original Xbox was the superior product gaining bonusses over the PS2 version), but I absolutely took the initial statement to that they would still do what I called at the time "Just cranking up the numbers". Where a texture was capped at 256x256 on PS2, on the Xbox I'd cap it at 512x512 instead. I absolutely would not regard that as a 'special effect' (later I rewrote the environment renderer to favour the Xbox, which I absolutely *would* have regarded as such).

So I found the original post clear and unambiguous, but that might just stem from more experience.

It probably is a matter of that sort of experience. I never had a discussion before about what "special graphical effects" are and the definition of that, so my assumption was merely that it was any effect the PS4 had that the XBO did not. Such as superior texture resolution or something like that.

Anyway we're all on the same page now about this. It's good to know for future discussions on this subject.

Yes, Hairworks is Nvidia's module for hair and fur simulation, it was first used in COD Ghosts.
The Gamescom gameplay of The Witcher 3 showed it at some point. Impressive effect for sure.

Did they fix it though? The early videos I seen of the effect seemed a bit awkward in my opinion.

 

[Krappadizzle]

I know this is PR but there must be some other way to phrase it.

If you're interested in Nvidia and CDProjekt's collaboration on TW3 :

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-demonstrates-witcher-3-hair-works-talks-hair-simulation-nextgen-flex-physx-turbulence-particles/

This is going to going to be very taxing, legitimately so.

Thanks for these links. Pretty awesome.

 

[kitch9]

Where am I denying it's more powerful? I just don't think it translates in games in the way that you think but let's agree to disagree. You still didn't respond to my previous questions though. That ease of porting should have brought up Planetside 2 on PS4 by now no?

Planetside 2 was originally very single threaded on the PC and the game suffered for it. It's taken a lot of time to get a multi threaded engine up and running.

 

[Kezen]

Wasn't the gamescom gameplay of the xb1 version? Or was there also a pc demonstration?

No, it was PC.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks

Did they fix it though? The early videos I seemed of the effect seemed a bit awkward in my opinion.

Experimental tech is by design imperfect. It looked believable enough to me but there is a long way to go if we want truly realistic hair and fur into our games.
It should be noted that Hairworks will run on AMD hardware as well. It uses DirectCompute and not CUDA.

 

[Mar Nosso]

Apparently going into marketing deals with Microsoft involves enough of unclear and obfuscating messages that being associated with them is getting absolutely toxic, as CDPR is also finding out. Not worth it for the extra bit of money developers receive, I would say.

 

[Amir0x]

No, it was PC.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks


Experimental tech is by design imperfect. It looked believable enough to me but there is a long way to go if we want truly realistic hair and fur into our games.
It should be noted that Hairworks will run on AMD hardware as well. It uses DirectCompute and not CUDA.

oh yeah. But it looked.. what's the word. Too fluffy? Hard to describe haha.

I'm glad it works on AMD Hardware since my PC is built around AMD tech

Edit: The grass demo looked sick though. Every blade of grass casts shadow on one another, goddamn lol

 

[cripterion]

I just didn't want to get into list wars. Do you really want me to list all the endless indies that are on PC and PS4 both? Do you really want me to list all the multiplatform games that are superior on PS4 than XBO (note: it's nearly all of them)? If you want me to, I will.

Nobody on neoGAF who knows me doubts my ability to source my points. I am a prolific at finding mountains of links to substantiate my claims. I've just been doing it in the Rise of Tomb Raider topic.

So it's up to you. If you want me to do that, I will. i suspect nobody wants me to do that though. I'm leaving it in your hands to decide. >

Not that, I wanted you to show me tangible examples of this so called ease of porting for PS4 when titles like Planetside 2 that were announced a while ago still haven't seen the light of day on the console. CoD having taken faster to port on PS4 than XBox One is just PR speak to me since the end result is the games coming out at the same time on consoles.

I never once denied the multiplats weren't performing better on PS4, reread my posts.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

So why are you using it as a pertinent answer, if you understand it isn't?

Who is using it as an answer to what?
I didn't even mention GDDR5 here.

 

[KKRT00]

Apparently going into marketing deals with Microsoft involves enough of unclear and obfuscating messages that being associated with them is getting absolutely toxic, as CDPR is also finding out. Not worth it for the extra bit of money developers receive, I would say.

Oh yeah, because general audience will care about some PR over-interpretation on gaming boards.
I would gladly took few millions over this in my company.

 

[jimboton]

Not necessarily. If CD Project is using the Xbox One as a baseline for 1080p @30fps, the PS4's extra power is not enough for the game to run at 1080p @60fps. So it is possible that both will be 1080p @30fps with the PS4 version sporting a couple of extra effects or a more stable frame rate.

Even if that were the case it would still be very easy to improve PS4 draw distances and LOD scaling over whatever 'baseline' level was arbitrarily established for both consloes to meet. Both things have a big impact in the visual experience in a game like this.

 

[Durante]

Indeed, just how many can be done at the same time..

Yes.

Maybe it's because I've done games developing (in an instance where the original Xbox was the superior product gaining bonusses over the PS2 version), but I absolutely took the initial statement to that they would still do what I called at the time "Just cranking up the numbers". Where a texture was capped at 256x256 on PS2, on the Xbox I'd cap it at 512x512 instead. I absolutely would not regard that as a 'special effect' (later I rewrote the environment renderer to favour the Xbox, which I absolutely *would* have regarded as such).

So I found the original post clear and unambiguous, but that might just stem from more experience.

Yeah, I took it in the same way.

It seems like as a game developer these days it you need a year of training just for "gamer communication" for any statement not to blow up in your face.

 

[Amir0x]

Not that, I wanted you to show me tangible examples of this so called ease of porting for PS4 when titles like Planetside 2 that were announced a while ago still haven't seen the light of day on the console.

This is the reason:

"The PS4 is a much more consistent, stable platform for us to be able to develop for. The big challenge with the PS4 is its AMD chip, and it really, heavily relies on multi-threading. We have the exact same kind of Achilles heel on the PC too. People who have AMD chips have a disadvantage, because a single core on an AMD chip doesn't really have as much horsepower and they really require you to kind of spread the load out across multiple cores to be able to take full advantage of the AMD processors.

"Our engine sucks at that right now. We are multi-threaded, but the primary gameplay thread is very expensive. The biggest piece of engineering work that they're doing right now, and it's an enormous effort, is to go back through the engine and re-optimise it to be really, truly multi-threaded and break the gameplay thread up. That's a very challenging thing to do because we're doing a lot of stuff - tracking all these different players, all of their movements, all the projectiles, all the physics they're doing.

"It's very challenging to split those really closely connected pieces of functionality across in multiple threads. So it's a big engineering task for them to do, but thankfully once they do it, AMD players who've been having sub-par performance on the PC will suddenly get a massive boost - just because of being able to take the engine and re-implement it as multi-threaded.

It was quite challenging to adapt the engine to the PS4's specific multi-threaded needs. The reason why some games have no problem - such as Warframe, which was out on PS4 extremely close to its launch - and others have more difficulties is a matter of the type of engine you're porting from. For example, the PS3 Last of Us was super heavily optimized for the ridiculously complex architecture of that console. As a result, it wasn't a simple thing to just port it over the PS4. It required a lot more work than a game developed on a more traditional platform with architecture closely related to x86.

That will explain the variation on some titles for you.

CoD having taken faster to port on PS4 than XBox One is just PR speak to me since the end result is the games coming out at the same time on consoles.

That doesn't make sense imo. A publisher sets a release date for a game. Even if they finish the PS4 version earlier, they're not going to release that version earlier. That'd give it de facto timed exclusivity, and if devs did that, you'd see a whole host of games releasing earlier on PS4. But that's not the way the industry works.

Instead, when you have extra time, you use that extra time to try to enhance the version of the game prior to it going Gold.

I never once denied the multiplats weren't performing better on PS4, reread my posts.

No, but you were incredulous when I mentioned the PS4 was significantly more powerful and easier to develop for than its competitor. I guess you didn't like the scale I was putting behind it? But it is indeed much, much more powerful.

 

[Dictator93]

Even if that were the case it would still be very easy to improve PS4 draw distances and LOD scaling over whatever 'baseline' level was arbitrarily established for both consloes to meet. Both things have a big impact in the visual experience in a game like this.

Given how tailored the experience on xbox 360 was for te Witcher 2 port, I would not worry about it.

Your game on teh PS4, will at some level, look/run beter than the xb1. They would not say this in an interview... because PR dudes do interviews. Not tech people.

 

[d9b]

I hope you realize that the article only has two out of context quotes from CDPR

“We always want to provide the best possible experience to all our gamers regardless of the platform and so we are not aiming to develop special graphical features for any of them,”

and

“We are still exploring some options regarding anti-aliasing but we are sure that it will be some kind of screen space anti-aliasing solution and not hardware MSAA,”

Everything else in the article is inferred by the writer of the article, and as such can't be considered a statement from CDPR. Without the context these statements really don't convey the message that the rest of the article does. GamingBolt are known too make click bait articles out of quotes taken out of context.

It was a very simple question and very simple answer. I don't know, looks pretty straight forward. Not sure about the wider context because there was no links in the article ... Was there full interview that isn't published yet?

 

[AkelisRain]

I would be surprised if this ran above 900p on either console, the first two games were power houses.

 

[Zarx]

It was a very simple question and very simple answer. I don't know, looks pretty straight forward. Not sure about the wider context because there was no links in the article ... Was there full interview that isn't published yet?

The interview hasn't been posted no. And we don't know what question was actually asked, that is the point. Everything else in the article other than those quotes was written after the fact to make click bait. It's not the first time they have done it and it won't be the last. It remains to be seen if/when they will post the full unedited interview, but they have been pulling quotes for almost a month.

 

[Crossing Eden]

No, it was PC.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/gamescom-2014-witcher-3-gameworks

Oh ok.

 

[cripterion]

This is the reason:

It was quite challenging to adapt the engine to the PS4's specific multi-threaded needs. The reason why some games have no problem - such as Warframe, which was out on PS4 extremely close to its launch - and others have more difficulties is a matter of the type of engine you're porting from. For example, the PS3 Last of Us was super heavily optimized for the ridiculously complex architecture of that console. As a result, it wasn't a simple thing to just port it over the PS4. It required a lot more work than a game developed on a more traditional platform with architecture closely related to x86.

That will explain the variation on some titles for you.

Fair enough, in the end it's easier to develop for some devs, but as the end user I'm not seeing the benefits of it when porting still takes time, and when you have clauses that will make games come out at the same time on both platforms.

My memory might be fuzzy but I'm pretty sure I read an article of CDP saying it was easy for them porting the Witcher III on Xbox One too, so what am I supposed to take from that?

That doesn't make sense imo. A publisher sets a release date for a game. Even if they finish the PS4 version earlier, they're not going to release that version earlier. That'd give it de facto timed exclusivity, and if devs did that, you'd see a whole host of games releasing earlier on PS4. But that's not the way the industry works.

Instead, when you have extra time, you use that extra time to try to enhance the version of the game prior to it going Gold.
.

That's why I said the end result is the same. With the PS4 versions only being better thanks to the hardware it has.
And wasn't Ghost a mess on both consoles when it came out?

No, but you were incredulous when I mentioned the PS4 was significantly more powerful and easier to develop for than its competitor. I guess you didn't like the scale I was putting behind it? But it is indeed much, much more powerful.

Yeah, I guess you could say that not having seen how it translates in the games I own.
Call me jaded if you want but when I hear significantly more powerful, I expect to see it shown on my screen.
When Uncharted 4 hits perhaps I'll revise my tune, but for now I'm not seeing it.