| SvennoJ said: If it was a multiplatform game, both would use the cloud... |
No they wouldn't, it just suits the comparison better. If this were a MP game that ran at 900p on XBone and 1080p on PS4 it would be used as evidence that the latter were more powerful. So if CD leveraged the cloud on XB1 and not the on the PS4 it would be same proof as otherwise.
Of course we could compare it to Infamous Second Son and the difference in destruction is the same, but then i'd get some bullshit about "Second Son wasn't built for destruction so doesn't need it" to prove a point, but that sucks.
| SvennoJ said: The cloud has nothing to do with debris staying or not. That's all in local memory, rendered locally, a choice by the developers to keep the debris as the rest of the graphics will have to be toned down already to compensate for the many pieces falling at once scenarios. (Btw in the demos not all debris stays, the pile of rubble is quite small compared to the buildings) |
Crackdown 3’s multiplayer is all about unscripted, real-time destruction on an unseen scale. 2009’s Red Faction: Guerrilla gave us a glimpse of this level of destruction but few developers since have followed suit. The problem, explains Jones, is that destruction on this grand level is a big drain on physics and requires a large amount of processing power and memory. More than a single box can realistically provide. Reagent’s solution to this problem is to leverage the Xbox One’s cloud computing capabilities to provide the horsepower necessary to facilitate a 100 per cent destructible environment...Impressively, none of the debris disappears either. The evidence of your destruction persists for as long as the game lasts.
| SvennoJ said: Yet it's not used since it limits the graphic fidelity compared to other games, hence a cell shaded game is getting this tech. |
Crackdown 3 is cel shaded, because crackdown is cel shaded. It always has been. Even for CGI trailers its celshaded. That has little to do with it.
| SvennoJ said: There are other ways to optimize total destruction. Red Faction Armageddon managed fine on 360, the Geomod engine should do fine scaled up to this gen. |
Assuming this is dealt with by the most powerful CPU this console generation has to offer, at best we can hope for is 1/14th of the destruction of crackdown.
| SvennoJ said: What would be a problem is online multiplayer when every client has to synchronize all the destruction with the other clients. Dedicated servers are a better solution when a lot of moving parts are involved. Plus the server has the luxury to calculate ahead and spoon feed the clients within a set bandwidth limit. As soon as you fire a rocket, the outcome can already be calculated. |
These "problems" are the same today. If I blow up a tank in a 32 player game of battlefield, that info still needs to be synched...as does every bullet fired etc.
| SvennoJ said:
Anyway we don't know much about the single player atm. How much destruction it will allow, or if the graphics will be enhanced compared to competive multiplayer. Nor how well it will work through an average internet connection through a shared wifi router. |
If there's an online caveat, then potentially the same. Even for game design, they could always unlock it upon the games completion.
Everything else is the same as any other games online performance.
