| curl-6 said: Architecture is irrelevant, therefore which console was the lead is irrelevant The engine is CPU bound, so the faster CPU wins, simple as that, no need for a Microsoft paycheck or an anti-Sony conspiracy. |
Architecture is irrelevant, therefore which console was the lead is irrelevant
Wrong, Which ever console was the lead has the hardware priority, Architecture only has to do with how the code is developed.
The engine is CPU bound
Why is the engine CPU bound? It does not make sense in any scenario where the XB1 is not the lead. Why does it perform better on the platform with better CPU? Hardware priority. XB1 had the development lead, PS4 runs the game with a 10% slower CPU, which slows down all of the rendering that depends on the process that run on that CPU. 40% GPU power advantage isn't utilized.
That also forgoes the need of anti-sony/pro-microsoft, and it makes a whole lot more sense then the engine just being CPU Bound for no reason whatsoever. Just the very fact that it was ported and not optimized is more than enough to satisfy these outcomes. Considering the marketting focus, its completely likely that XB1 was dev focus as well, especially considering that lateral porting is so much easier compared to last gen.
In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank
