John Bender
Banned
Nah, TLOU:R was good.
If it's between 60fps - 50fps, it's good.
If it drops regularly below 50, screw it.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
PlanetSide 2 PS4 beta planned for 2014, aiming for 1080p60
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
If it's between 60fps - 50fps, it's good.
If it drops regularly below 50, screw it.
Darryl M R
Member
I heard that PS2 could have 2000 players per map, how many do you all think the PS4 can hold?
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
All 2000, played DC Universe Online and Final Fantasy XIV so I have allot of faith in SOE when it comes to getting a massive game to run on a console while remaining smooth and playable. I know PS2 is a fps with allot of combat going on all at once but im pretty confident in SOE Pulling it off.
If they went that route it could have been steamroller.
The devkit's had bulldozer though, cause steamroller didn't exist back then.
Is that really possible? I've played a decent amount of PlanetSide 2 and have yet to see anything even remotely close to that. There can be loads of players on screen but 2000?! I wonder how my PC would hold up in such a battle?
IAmRandom31
Banned
its not up to the PS4, thats all server stuff.
Technically yeah, everyone plays on the map together and up to 2000 at once. So technically, everyone could be in the same zone but nah, there are usually 6-7 major battles going on with a dozen or so other skirmishes in other zones. So the action is more spread out.
The most chaotic battle I was in had 12 squads together along with oh .. 30-40 random other peeps sweeping zones. After 3 zones fell pretty fast the enemy gathered a counterattack and met us on an open field with atleast 200 people of their own. So was probably 350-400 people in that battle.
Glorious Ownage
Member
Okay so we've got some news on this can't wait! Now where is my N++!!?
Yeah but a "map" is the entire continent, right? It's not like those 2000 people on the continent are going to be on your particular screen at once or even assaulting the same base you happen to be at.
Pyros_Eien
Member
Well technically, they can be on the server, not the "map". I don't think you can get 2000people on the same continent due to limitations. Even if you could, it'd be very unlikely that all 2000 would be in visible range of anyone, since that many people would try to cap the entire thing and spread out. The scope of Planetside2 isn't anything like your common FPS, not even Battlefield.
It's very much a "mmofps" in the sense that the continents are extremely large and have multiple bases on them that each act like a "map" in other FPS term, so you rarely get fights with more than 200-300people. Still, that's a fuckton of people. Seeing dozens of tanks rolling down the hills or the sky being darkened by air forces while everything around you is explosions and people scrambling about is pretty epic.
Then Biolabs, and fuck this game.
Original plan was 2000 per continent, so 666 per faction.
But there are always rumors that this was downgraded.
You also normally only have 2 factions battle a big battle at one spot.
The highest number visible on the map seems to be 96, cause if you have over 96 in a spot it only shows as 96+ instead of 6-12, 12-24, 24-48. 48-96.
Everytime the convoy reaches a biolab, i just go "nope" and respawn somewhere else.
Yup, it wasn't ready.
jim2point0
Banned
In large battles, this game drops to 30 FPS on my rig with a 3770k @ 4.4Ghz + GTX 980. It's all on the CPU though (the game tells you which is holing you back). I'd be impressed if they could manage a constant 60 on consoles...
I only extensively played the first game (and loved it). Are Biolabs impossible to defend in PS2 or something?
Here's my thinking on it. They're going to AIM for 60fps so that they make the game as easy on the CPU as possible. Once they can optimize the game to achieve something close to 60fps through the anemic CPU the console has, then they can drop it to 30fps and then even when things heat up, because they've optimized it to be playable at something close to 60, the game will hold 30 much better when the shit hits the fan.
Because of the nature of this kind of game, they basically need to optimize it so that it "can" run at 60fps in the best of circumstances so that when they lock it to 30 in the end, it will be better able to hold 30fps in the "worst" of circumstances.
Blackthorn
"hello?" "this is vagina"
I'm hoping for a 30fps lock since I'm very sceptical of a consistent framerate. When I played on PC I had to lock it to 30, but the engine had impressively little input lag and a very nice motion blur that made it perfectly playable.
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
I thought they said player count would be smaller on ps4. Like 1000
Where did they say that? I think they indicated the game would support just as many players as there are on PC (666 per side, right?).
Are they going to reduce the number of continents or make the continents smaller? Because I don't see why they'd want to put a 1/2 population limit on a game world size designed for 2000 people. Like spreading only half the usual amount of butter on your toast...it will make the game not as much fun if everyone is too spread out.
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
where did you hear that ? I keep hearing the dev saying the PS4 will be the exact scale as PC regarding the numbers the game holds for battles.
I would say it's one of the easiest to defend, cause you only have small spaces were you can enter and if you are in you have 3 spots to hold in a really small place.
So new spawned defenders can be there really fast.
The thing i don't like is that the place is so small and you can't go around something cause it's not a part of the continent like the other places cause it's above the ground.
You just don't have as many options as in other areas.
The size and the closeness of the area leads to a scenario where firepower counts more than skill relative to the other areas.
At least that is my impression.
I though ps4 specs was quite notorious from 2012. Now ubisoft had predicted cpu was more powerfull based on what? I definitely agree with him it's not ambitious try to fly with a car. And I'm not sure how a normal person can see the difference between 1600 npc and 5000 compared the horrible pop in to pay for this.
Cave Johnson
Member
It's noticeable. I believe this has to do with TV refresh rates rendering at 30/60fps exclusively which is why Nvidia opted for a G-Sync solution to fix this particular issue. From what I've heard, this technology would make it so that the fluctuation wouldn't be that noticeable, if any at all.
Damn that CPU is always gonna be the problem. GPGPU is not feasible in many situations...its just maddening hearing the CPU every single time. Damn...its like every other component in the damn console is pretty decent, but the CPU is just so far below everything else it drags it all down.
put a 4670k in it and the game still wont hold 60
Yea if it manages a to stay above 30 I would be impressed especially reading how demanding it is on far better CPU's. Have not played it I wonder if there's a lot of situation's where fast reaction's would matter and controller responsiveness.
Yeah, but thats before PS4's optimizations, which they will add to PC version.
---
Its ambitious game, especially for a console title, but not in scale of PS2 though. And i need to see the framerate too.
And I dont know how cant You see CPU a problem, when they postponed game for 1.5 year, but ok.
---
Still is ambitious. The macro and micro scale is outstanding in AC:U, i dont know how can anyone deny that. Should they scale down console versions down? Sure, but it doesnt mean they shouldnt get credit for being ambitious.
I thought they optimized the game a while ago? Or was that just a general performance fix and they still decided to wait until the PS4 version before they'd properly fix it?
TrojanBlade
Member
Can't they use the GPU to do some work on behalf of the CPU? Is that possible in the optimization phase to make it lock at 60? They should lock to 30 and give option for 60 for some who want to try that if they can't lock at 60.
EventHorizon
Member
PlanetSide 2 has always had CPU issues. The engine was originally single threaded, and I believe the reason it's been delayed so long on the PS4 is that they had to convert it to be multithreaded, which is very hard to do. That is especially true if you aren't used to making multithreaded programming. With its scale, if the game ends up being 60 FPS I'll be extremely impressed.
I'm not really sure, i'm not following development, but i think they said that they will release all PS4 optimization when they'll finish.
Hip Hop
Member
Way different experiences to be able to compare them.
Planetside is like a Battlefield game, on an insane scale.
Philthy
Member
One of my favorite shooters. It's an amazing game and I can't wait for this to show up on my PS4.
The dev team is just so slow, though. It took them like a year just to get a single map done when they should be pooping out maps every month. I got really bored with the same areas and in the end didn't care for Hossin at all. I'll fire it back up when the PS4 version comes out and hopefully with more content (MAPS) because you need that to keep people playing.
The dev team is just so slow, though. It took them like a year just to get a single map done when they should be pooping out maps every month. I got really bored with the same areas and in the end didn't care for Hossin at all. I'll fire it back up when the PS4 version comes out and hopefully with more content (MAPS) because you need that to keep people playing.
What they need to do is get physx fixed
Iced_Eagle
Member
It doesn't render all 2,000 players though. The game has some internal cap on how many players it will render, and that takes distance into account too.
Really frustrating when you are a sniper, get ready to fire at someone and before you can fire he simply disappears. :|
ThreePiMatt
Member
I dunno, that doesn't happen nearly as often as it used to.
But in general, "large" battles are probably in the 200-300 player ranges. At that size most bases are a clusterfuck that the things that aren't rendering is like the least greatest threat.
The only time render range is really impactful is in infantry vs. vehicle scenarios. Since vehicles render out further than infantry you'll sometimes get into situations where your vehicle is being hit by something further out than you can see, most notably Lancers, Burster MAXes, or engie turrets.
pixellated_man
Member
Looking forward to playing this as much as anyone else...but expecting a 30fps lock. I really can't see how this game will be a 60fps locked (or even a perceptual 60) experience on PS4 when pc's many times more powerful, especially on the cpu side, can't manage that. I'll be more than happy if it's a locked 30fps. Don't want a messy 30-60fps fluctuating experience, thank you very much.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Damn I remember building my rig around this time two years ago when it first launched on PC. Wasn't able to fully max it but came close, really hope they do manage to nail performance for this. Just picked up a PS4 the other day and was playing some Blacklight Retribution, love the feel of the controller for multi shooters. Was surprised by the screen tearing in Blacklight though, not really a lot going on there. Here's hoping they can get high qualiuty + fps with Planetside.
Chinpoko_Master
Member
Sounding more and more like the CPU really is the bottleneck for these consoles.
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
It might have been my imagination, it was ages ago and I can't find any article.
DirgeExtinction
Member
Good to hear.
If I remember correctly, didn't a PS2 dev say that one of the reasons for the delay was to work on their engine to take advantage of multithreaded operations?
Or something like that.
If I remember correctly, didn't a PS2 dev say that one of the reasons for the delay was to work on their engine to take advantage of multithreaded operations?
Or something like that.