Pemalite said:
chakkra said:
Except in this case they actually said:
"We are also excited for the game to demonstrate the power of PlayStation 5 this holiday. Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales will show off near-instant loading, ray-tracing, 3D audio and the DualSense controller. We’ve upgraded our characters with 4D scans and improved skin shading for more realistic looking characters and spline-based hair that moves far more naturally. Many of the city’s assets have also been updated to take advantage of the new console. As you experience Miles’s story, you’ll see, hear, and feel things in a whole new way, all thanks to PS5."
I might be wrong here but to me, that sounds like they actually added stuff to already existing assets, not that they built new assets for this version.
|
Can still be downgraded.
It's running on the same game engine as the first game... And is a game engine that would even function fine on an Xbox 360... Swapping in higher quality assets doesn't negate the possibility of downgrading those assets later, it actually happens often in game development.
Darc Requiem said:
Pointing to PC as an example doesn't help his case. SSDs have been a thing on PC for gaming for quite some time. However, they haven't been leveraged properly because devs take 5400rpm mechanical drives into account. Also PC games in general have are pushed as far as they can because they've had to take the base XB1 and base PS4 into account. I don't get the logic of developing beastly hardware like the Series X only to have the base XB1 as an anchor to it's capabilities. The base XB1 has been struggling with current gen games. Sony is going for a clean break with their 1st Party games and this will give them the decided advantage over MS because they don't have to take last gen hardware into account at all. The strength of consoles is high optimization. MS muting that advantage. Developers were shaky on last gen with X1X, PS4 Pro, Base PS4, and Base XB1 games.
|
PC games constantly improve every year.
If the Xbox One and Playstation 4 stayed on the market for another 10 years, the console ports will still get more and more enhancements as PC technology continues to progress.
Case in point: Tessellation during 7th gen. Ray Tracing this gen.
Storage speeds are not as much of a hindrance on PC as the PC is also a memory rich environment... A mid-range PC has 3x the total Ram as a Playstation 4 and 50% more than a Playstation 5, more data can be loaded into System and GPU memory in one load rather than streamed in iteratively.
goopy20 said:
I know there's a subgroup who try to run games at lower than the lowest settings, just like there's a huge mod community that try to push the visuals beyond what the developers intended. However, developers didn't officially support those settings as they typically don't want their games to look totally different on different platforms.
|
Not really. PC isn't console. PC games generally always look superior to console versions.
Just because those settings aren't exposed in a games User-Interface doesn't mean that developers have hidden those settings behind lock and key, most game engines and games have documentation that provides the appropriate guidance on adjusting settings outside of the games internal user interface. (Some games even have an "app" outside of the game for you to do just this.)
goopy20 said:
As soon as developers decide to build their game for multiple platforms, parity becomes a thing that affects the entire design and ambitions of the project before they even started making it. Unfortunately, that means the ambitions on the far more powerful platform will always be held back because of it.
|
Parity isn't a thing.
Battlefield on Xbox 360/Playstation 3 was severely paired back in map sizes and player counts and graphics. Massively in the graphics department.
Minecraft on Xbox 360/Playstation 3 had limited map sizes and blocks, definitely not parity.
Battlefield 5, Call of Duty: Modern Warefare, Control, Mechwarrior 5: Mercenaries, Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Wolfenstein Young Blood, Doom Eternal, Dying Light 2, Watch Dogs: Legions and allot more... Have this thing called "Hardware Ray Tracing". - The Xbox One and Playstation 4 variants do not, definitely not parity.
Pretty much every PC game since forever can exceed the 3840x2160 limit of the Xbox One X and Playstation 4 Pro. - 7680x1440 or maybe 11,520x2160 tickle your fancy? Again. Not parity.
60fps? Try 240fps. Not parity.
HBAO instead of SSAO? 16x AF rather than 4x? Super Sampling instead of FXAA? No parity there either.
goopy20 said:
What I really don't like about that is just how much of computing power is essentially wasted in the pursuit of 4k and 60fps. I'm not saying that 4k doesn't bring better clarity, more detail etc. but imo, the turn to 4k is happening too soon in relation to available computing power. Hell, 1440p has not even become mainstream in the pc space and now we have this 4k "craze" that brings down even the mighty RTX2080 to it's knees with current gen games. It'll massively slow down the pursuit towards better graphical fidelity, as gpu's in both PC and consoles need to push 4 times the amount of pixels.
|
We were in the same position years ago when people complained about how much "computing power" is essentially wasted in pursuit of 1080P.
During the 7th gen people would praise games like Uncharted and Halo 4's visual makeup... But resolution wasn't apparently important then, suddenly 1080P became super important during the 8th gen and anything less was utter garbage.
Resolution is just a piece of the rendering puzzle, 4k is far from a craze, it's an actual standard.
The PC cannot be compared to consoles in this regard, PC displays are generally smaller with higher pixel densities than a television, so 2160P isn't as important.
goopy20 said:
I mean, imagine what would be possible on Series X if instead of sticking with base Xbox One settings and maxing out resolution, developers could focus on ramping up visuals to a maximum while keeping 1440p or even 1080p as target rendering resolution. With Series X that won't be possible as developers will already be doing that on the 4Tflops Lockhart.
|
Hardware has a resolution "efficiency curve".
Cutting back games to 720P on the Xbox Series X would not bring you much additional rendering headroom over say... 1080P, because the bottleneck in the GPU pipeline isn't fillrate.
Eventually 2160P will be in that same situation, 1440P is barely a performance hit over 1080P on a modern and decent GPU.
Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo just simply need to deliver the hardware and the appropriate software stacks... Leave the rest (including resolution) up to the developers.
|
