Support NeoGAF

[SniperHunter]

Or it could suggest that they're jobbing the PC port to give the PS4 a push.

But EA and MS have a contract in place...an EA pulished new ip isn't even coming to either ps3 or ps4. All bf4 dlc will hit xbox first.

Why would they push the ps4?

 

[SeanR1221]

Imagine two XB360s duct taped together. Now duct tape them to an XBone.

The PS4 is a little more powerful than that, but that's before you take in to account the XBone not really being able to make full use of its GPU. The gap is actually bigger than the specs might imply.

That literally doesn't answer anything.

Give me a tangible comparison. Are we talking ps3-Wii? Xbox-ps2? What?

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Could Computing is newly emerging. I have faith in the technology and I think the X1 integrated it in knowing that in a few years from now its potential to augment our gaming experience was worth the investment out the gate. Though I believe Sony has the more powerful system currently, it's hard to know what the future has in store. This generation could last 10 or 15 years. These systems are built to be sustainable and evolve. They will be very different machines 5 years from now.

Even if the cloud is able to make a significant impact on game rendering, you still can't guarantee users have the minimum bandwidth necessary.

 

[Anticitizen One]

Ill sacrifice 60 FPS if the graphics look amazing

 

[Dreams-Visions]

they locked the PC version to 30fps?

really?

 

[Radec]

Ok, as someone who has no idea what any of this tech stuff means, what a flop is or anything like that. Someone explain to me. What is the perceived difference in power between xb1 and ps4. I see 50% difference thrown around a lot. So are we talking like...ps3 to the wii difference? Or what?

Super Saiyan 4 Goku vs Majin Vegeta kind of difference.

 

[Nethaniah]

they locked the PC version to 30fps?

really?

That's the word that's been spreading, been trying to find actual confirmation but so far no luck.

 

[SwiftDeath]

a game at 60 fps LOOKS better in motion then a game at 30. this isnt a difficult concept.

NO the same game at 60 fps LOOKS better in motion then the same game at 30 fps

But you will have to sacrifice something to get there if you're working in a closed box

Forza @ 30fps =/= DC @ 30 fps

You can't just use one metric like the framerate to try and objectively say what game looks better

Some people enjoy the dynamic lighting, extra foilage etc.

 

[SapientWolf]

But EA and MS have a contract in place...an EA pulished new ip isn't even coming to either ps3 or ps4. All bf4 dlc will hit xbox first.

Why would they push the ps4?

Same reason why the PS3 version of BF3 got all the DLC first, and was prominent at the trade shows. Those sort of deals seem to happen on a game by game basis.

 

[bishoptl]

Could Computing is newly emerging. I have faith in the technology and I think the X1 integrated it in knowing that in a few years from now its potential to augment our gaming experience was worth the investment out the gate. Though I believe Sony has the more powerful system currently, it's hard to know what the future has in store. This generation could last 10 or 15 years. These systems are built to be sustainable and evolve. They will be very different machines 5 years from now.

Hoo boy. This again.

 

[viveks86]

That's the word that's been spreading, been trying to find actual confirmation but so far no luck.

There isn't. I've been digging too. It's unclear if they were even talking about the PC version when they said "all platforms". I'm labeling this as a rumor for now. PC gamers should do the same.

 

[mrprice33]

Here's 10 minutes of gameplay courtesy of IGN. Looks to be played on an Xbox One.

http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/10/1...+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

Edit: player says it's PC build. Nevermind.

 

[luxstellarum]

Because not every member of Neogaf steps into spec war threads? There is quite a few members that never venture out of OT and for good reason.

Thing is he's trying to talk specs. If he can't grasp the blatant difference between the two consoles (on paper at least) then he really shouldn't be talking specs. Its that simple.

 

[SniperHunter]

Same reason why the PS3 version of BF3 got all the DLC first, and was prominent at the trade shows. Those sort of deals seem to happen on a game by game basis.

Ea has nothing to gain by holding back the pc version imo. Most console gamers dont even care about the pc ver or pc gaming, they just want to pick up a great racer at launch.

Btw if bf4 is running at 60 fps so ahould this.

 

[viveks86]

Ea has nothing to gain by holding back the pc version imo. Most console gamers dont even care about the pc ver or pc gaming, they just want to pick up a great racer at launch.

Btw if bf4 is running at 60 fps so ahould this.

Another valid point to dismiss this rumor. If EA had some ridiculous policy to gimp PC versions, it should happen to all EA games. Don't see why NFS would get special treatment. The rumor makes no sense. Unless, both MS and Sony money-hatted EA to make sure PC gaming doesn't seem far too superior to the console versions. That makes even less sense.

Having said that, I will admit that I had been dismissing a certain other rumor all of yesterday and am still full from eating 2 servings of crow. So my opinion means diddly poo at this point.

 

[artist]

Hoo boy. This again.

 

[Nethaniah]

Another valid point to dismiss this rumor. If EA had some ridiculous policy to gimp PC versions, it should happen to all EA games. Don't see why NFS would get special treatment. The rumor makes no sense. Unless, both MS and Sony money-hatted EA to make sure PC gaming doesn't seem far too superior to the console versions. That makes even less sense.

Having said that, I will admit that I had been dismissing a certain other rumor all of yesterday and am still full from eating 2 servings of crow. So my opinion means diddly poo at this point.

Dice themselves love the pc though and even EA would know Battlefield would be done on pc if they ever introduced an fps cap, i doubt EA would force Dice to limit their games in this way.

 

[viveks86]

Dice themselves love the pc though and even EA would know Battlefield would be done on pc if they ever introduced an fps cap.

True. But what rationale are you suggesting for capping it in the first place? Moneyhatting by MS or Sony or both?

 

[Uno Venova]

1.3 vs 1.84 is not as big a difference as you think it's going to be. Maybe, just maybe you'll be able to crunch AI numbers slightly better and it's my understanding that the CPU and GPU of the X1 have recently been increased. So your looking at a difference of .30 or 40 teraflop calcs per second. When you factor in the cloud and the ability to be able to offload intensive operations like AI you free of a lot of computing for graphics. Cloud won't make the games look better, but it will free up the computing to allow games to look better. Either way, NFS is going to look amazing on both consoles.

Oh man I lost my shit at when you factor in the cloud.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Ea has nothing to gain by holding back the pc version imo. Most console gamers dont even care about the pc ver or pc gaming, they just want to pick up a great racer at launch.

Btw if bf4 is running at 60 fps so ahould this.

They probably just wanna get it out there for launch and can't spend time/money to optimize

Edit: Not expecting much from any launch games

 

[SapientWolf]

Ea has nothing to gain by holding back the pc version imo. Most console gamers dont even care about the pc ver or pc gaming, they just want to pick up a great racer at launch.

Btw if bf4 is running at 60 fps so ahould this.

But if there is a deal, they might have something to lose by showing the PS4 version getting teabagged by the PC port sitting next to it. AMD and Nvidia don't seem to have their hands in the pot for Rivals so they don't have much to gain from that scenario either.

I think Rivals will run at an unlocked framerate on the PC but EA isn't going to talk about that version at all in their PR or marketing.

 

[viveks86]

They probably just wanna get it out there for launch and can't spend time/money to optimize

But how is capping frame rate for PCs related to that? Capping frame rate would require extra work compared to not capping it and letting PCs brute forcing it, right?

 

[serversurfer]

That literally doesn't answer anything.

Give me a tangible comparison. Are we talking ps3-Wii? Xbox-ps2? What?

Well, it's hard to compare older consoles similarly because they all used different architectures. The best comparison is probably the Radeon HD 7770 vs. HD 7850, since those are the parts which most closely match what's actually in the consoles.

In practical terms, since the PS4's GPU is ~50% more powerful, that means if a game runs at 1080p30 on the PS4, it will only run at 900p30 on XBone. However, it's a little more complicated than that, because although the XBone's GPU is similar to the 7770, the 7770 should be backed by 2GB of comparatively fast GDDR5, but the XBone uses comparatively slow DDR3. The eSRAM is also comparatively fast, but it only provides 32 of the 2048 MB of "fast" RAM the GPU normally has access to.

That means that as a general rule, the XBone's performance will be lower than the 67% on-paper performance listed. So a game that's 1080p30 on PS4 will probably be sub-900p30 on XBone.

Resolution drops to compensate for performance diferences seem most likely, since most gamers won't notice it as readily as missing particle effects, etc. but it's possible they might also drop certain effects the XBone particularly struggles with.

 

[viveks86]

Oh man I lost my shit at when you factor in the cloud.

I actually lost it at .3 or .4. LOL.

 

[mrprice33]

But how is capping frame rate related to that? Capping frame rate would require extra work compared to not capping it and letting PCs brute forcing it, right?

Not if the framerate isn't steady. Could be that unoptimized it runs at ~40-50 with constant dips down to 30.

 

[SniperHunter]

But if there is a deal, they might have something to lose by showing the PS4 version getting teabagged by the PC port sitting next to it. AMD and Nvidia don't seem to have their hands in the pot for Rivals so they don't have much to gain from that scenario either.

I think Rivals will run at an unlocked framerate on the PC but EA isn't going to talk about that version at all in their PR or marketing.

Only people on.forums care abouy one version sitting next.to.the pc version. Ass creed 4 runs at 30 on ps4 and ubisoft showed it to everyone last week and today they showed the 4k 60 fps pv version. I think you are insane

If what you are suggesting.were true it would be a company wide EA policy and not apply.to one game

 

[Nethaniah]

True. But what rationale are you suggesting for capping it in the first place? Moneyhatting by MS or Sony or both?

I don't know, i'm still puzzled as to why Criterion found it a good idea to fps cap all of their games on pc, same with Blackbox and The Run but they fixed that.

I just want this to be known before release, not that i would pre-order it if it was uncapped but atleast that would be out of the way, one less thing they could fuck up this game with.

 

[viveks86]

Not if the framerate isn't steady. Could be that unoptimized it runs at ~40-50 with constant dips down to 30.

Hmmm... Still don't compute. ~40-50 with respect to what hardware? Minimum PC requirements? Recommended requirements? GTX Titan?

 

[viveks86]

I don't know, i'm still puzzled as to why Criterion found it a good idea to fps cap all of their games on pc, same with blackbox and the run but they fixed that.

I just want this to be known before release, not that i would pre-order it if it was uncapped but atleast that would be out of the way, one less thing they could fuck up this game with.

Puzzling indeed. So blackbox had capped the run? At 30? That's from EA. That weakens my argument doesn't it?

 

[mrprice33]

Hmmm... Still don't compute. ~40-50 with respect to what hardware? Minimum PC requirements? Recommended requirements? GTX Titan?

Who knows?

But a dev can't just say "let the pc brute force it" when the code isn't optimized properly. The hardware may not matter in that case.

And, if you want people to be able to play your game (and therefore buy it), making it run properly on hardware is the most important thing. Releasing a shoddy port with an unsteady framerate just for the sake of uncapping it may do more harm than good.

For example, NBA 2K13 had constant stutters on PC, regardless of hardware. There was no "brute forcing" it. The code wasn't optimized properly.

 

[TheD]

Another valid point to dismiss this rumor. If EA had some ridiculous policy to gimp PC versions, it should happen to all EA games. Don't see why NFS would get special treatment. The rumor makes no sense. Unless, both MS and Sony money-hatted EA to make sure PC gaming doesn't seem far too superior to the console versions. That makes even less sense.
.

Well they did go out of their way to cap NFS: The Run bar the fact it used Frostbite 3.

Who knows?

But a dev can't just say "let the pc brute force it" when the code isn't optimized properly. The hardware may not matter in that case.

And, if you want people to be able to play your game (and therefore buy it), making it run properly on hardware is the most important thing. Releasing a shoddy port with an unsteady framerate just for the sake of uncapping it may do more harm than good.

For example, NBA 2K13 had constant stutters on PC, regardless of hardware. There was no "brute forcing" it. The code wasn't optimized properly.

It does not work like that.

If the game can run at 30FPS it should work at 60FPS on a system that is 2x as powerful unless they have fucked up the programming of the game logic.

Not optimized properly only means that it does not run as well as it should, not that it can not run any faster.

Stuttering like that in games is due to bad programming, any good programmer should fix their shit instead of taking the wrong way out.

 

[viveks86]

Who knows?

But a dev can't just say "let the pc brute force it" when the code isn't optimized properly. The hardware may not matter in that case.

And, if you want people to be able to play your game (and therefore buy it), making it run properly on hardware is the most important thing. Releasing a shoddy port with an unsteady framerate just for the sake of uncapping it may do more harm than good.

For example, NBA 2K13 had constant stutters on PC, regardless of hardware. There was no "brute forcing" it. The code wasn't optimized properly.

Point taken.

 

[SapientWolf]

Only people on.forums care abouy one version sitting next.to.the pc version. Ass creed 4 runs at 30 on ps4 and ubisoft showed it to everyone last week and today they showed the 4k 60 fps pv version. I think you are insane

If what you are suggesting.were true it would be a company wide EA policy and not apply.to one game

The people that made the marketing deals with EA might also care. There are deals in place for BF3, BF4, Titanfall, and even Plants and Zombies: Garden Warfare. EA takes payola all the time.

The only other explanation is that EA can't afford PC hardware to run Rivals at better settings than the PS4, or their programmers (a lot of whom are from DICE) are too incompetent to do so. Which sounds even more insane to me.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Not if the framerate isn't steady. Could be that unoptimized it runs at ~40-50 with constant dips down to 30.

Yup. They'd rather go with the constant fps than have drops which would annoy everyone

 

[SeanR1221]

Well, it's hard to compare older consoles similarly because they all used different architectures. The best comparison is probably the Radeon HD 7770 vs. HD 7850, since those are the parts which most closely match what's actually in the consoles.

In practical terms, since the PS4's GPU is ~50% more powerful, that means if a game runs at 1080p30 on the PS4, it will only run at 900p30 on XBone. However, it's a little more complicated than that, because although the XBone's GPU is similar to the 7770, the 7770 should be backed by 2GB of comparatively fast GDDR5, but the XBone uses comparatively slow DDR3. The eSRAM is also comparatively fast, but it only provides 32 of the 2048 MB of "fast" RAM the GPU normally has access to.

That means that as a general rule, the XBone's performance will be lower than the 67% on-paper performance listed. So a game that's 1080p30 on PS4 will probably be sub-900p30 on XBone.

Resolution drops to compensate for performance diferences seem most likely, since most gamers won't notice it as readily as missing particle effects, etc. but it's possible they might also drop certain effects the XBone particularly struggles with.

When I say I don't understand this stuff, I mean it, so your post made no sense to me. Just give me the closest tangible comparison you can. Everyone's making such a big deal out of this I want to be able to visualize it.

 

[viveks86]

Well they did go out of their way to cap NFS: The Run bar the fact it used Frostbite 3.

Yup. I didn't know that till I saw Nethaniah's post. Forget everything I said. My defense has completely crumbled :'(

Good luck PC gamers! If you do get the shaft, I will shed one tear for you. I promise

 

[Muppet of a Man]

There should definitely be no gimping going on. This parity stuff is nonsense. If there is not significantly more work involved to make the game look or perform better on one platform over another, the dev should do the honest and right thing and allow the engine to scale. This goes for PC, PS4, X1, etc. (across the board).

 

[Sword Of Doom]

When I say I don't understand this stuff, I mean it, so your post made no sense to me. Just give me the closest tangible comparison you can. Everyone's making such a big deal out of this I want to be able to visualize it.

lol the guy explained it pretty clearly. I don't think you can compare it to two other consoles from generations passed. It's not as significant as PS2 vs XBox. Wii Vs PS3/360 that was completely different. HD gaming vs 480

 

[SniperHunter]

The people that made the marketing deals with EA might also care. There are deals in place for BF3, BF4, Titanfall, and even Plants and Zombies: Garden Warfare. EA takes payola all the time.

The only other explanation is that EA can't afford PC hardware to run Rivals at better settings than the PS4, or their programmers (a lot of whom are from DICE) are too incompetent to do so. Which sounds even more insane to me.

Argh....planetside 2 is made by soe. It was released last year and it looks better than any launch ps4 game. Ea doesnt have any deals with sony. They didnt appear during the feb show or the sony e3 presser. Nfs has been losing market share, why would sony buy it out and sabotage the pc version? Your posts are insane.

The only two racing games Sony cares about are their own Gt6 and driveclub, both of them costing them millions of dollars.

 

[SeanR1221]

lol the guy explained it pretty clearly. I don't think you can compare it to two other consoles from generations passed. It's not as significant as PS2 vs XBox. Wii Vs PS3/360 that was completely different. HD gaming vs 480

To someone who doesn't understand this stuff it doesn't make sense to me, sorry man :/. For example, I have no clue what esram is.

So not as big of a difference as ps2 vs xbox? Which I already found pretty small of a difference to begin with, so that's good.

 

[mrprice33]

The idea that the PC version would cannibalize sales from console versions is weird to me.

Using ******** (I know, I know) as a guide, the PC version of most wanted sold less than the Vita version. Why would Sony/MS go out of their way to influence a 3rd party to gimp a version nobody buys anyway?

And, if said third party did think they could make money off this version, why would they sacrifice that revenue? It's not like Sony/MS would ever say "No thanks, EA, we don't want your games since need for speed was 60 FPS on pcs."

 

[viveks86]

Argh....planetside 2 is made by soe. It was released last year and it looks better than any launch ps4 game. Ea doesnt have any deals with sony. They didnt appear during the feb show or the sony e3 presser. Nfs has been losing market share, why would sony buy it out and sabotage the pc version? Your posts are insane

Yeah I agree with you on his posts. But how do you explain NFS: The Run being capped on PC? I couldn't find any meaningful explanation. I'm stumped! If you don't have one either, I'm abandoning this sinking ship we both seem to have hopped on. :/

 

[SniperHunter]

Yeah I agree with you on his posts. But how do you explain NFS: The Run being capped on PC? I couldn't find any meaningful explanation. I'm stumped! If you don't have an explanation, I'm abandoning this sinking ship we both seem to have hopped on. :/

Obviously Sony gave a moneyhat to EA and asked them to maintain parity with the PS3 version. Because if console gamers ever saw the pc version of NFS THE RUN running at 60 FPS beside the 30 fps ps3 version, ps3 sales would cease the next day. I think sapient wolf is on to something with his theory

 

[IcyRhythms]

Criterion isn't developing this, correct?

No buy from me

 

[viveks86]

Obviously Sony gave a moneyhat to EA and asked them to maintain parity with the PS3 version. Because if console gamers ever saw the pc version of NFS THE RUN running at 60 FPS beside the 30 fps ps3 version, ps3 sales would cease the next day. I think sapient wolf is on to something with his theory

LOL. SniperHunter! I was asking you seriously. Moneyhatting did not happen. SapientWolf's theory is crazy. Give me another explanation that I can digest.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

1.3 vs 1.84 is not as big a difference as you think it's going to be. Maybe, just maybe you'll be able to crunch AI numbers slightly better and it's my understanding that the CPU and GPU of the X1 have recently been increased. So your looking at a difference of .30 or 40 teraflop calcs per second. When you factor in the cloud and the ability to be able to offload intensive operations like AI you free of a lot of computing for graphics. Cloud won't make the games look better, but it will free up the computing to allow games to look better. Either way, NFS is going to look amazing on both consoles.

Yeah, 500gflops of computing power is nothing. Then again, why am I bothering. Gotta love the "Maybe, just maybe you'll be able to crunch AI numbers slightly better and it's my understanding that the CPU and GPU of the X1 have recently been increased." bit though.

 

[SolidSnakex]

So not as big of a difference as ps2 vs xbox? Which I already found pretty small of a difference to begin with, so that's good.

There was a pretty big difference between the two when you saw exclusives or games that lead on the Xbox. Chaos Theory is probably the best game to showcase this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkHoDEh0FWc

 

[viveks86]

Yeah, 500gflops of computing power is nothing. Then again, why am I bothering. Gotta love the "Maybe, just maybe you'll be able to crunch AI numbers slightly better and it's my understanding that the CPU and GPU of the X1 have recently been increased." bit though.

He said 300 or 400 gflops. One of you needs to check your math.

 

[SniperHunter]

The nfs the run also ran on frost bite 3 and had auto log i think...tech limitation probably

I think pc gamers got it running at 60 fps eventually

 

[viveks86]

The nfs the run also ran on frost bite 3 and had auto log i think...

I think pc gamers got it running at 60 fps eventually

It did. What I'm trying to understand is why was there a cap in the beginning? Since it was unlocked eventually, it means there was no moneyhatting. The only explanation left is that frame rate was so wild no matter what hardware you used that they decided to fix it at the baseline until they could optimize it later on.