Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by harkinsteven, Oct 15, 2014.
Who knows what to believe these days, we will now have to await Sony's comment on the situation, and personally if it's anyone is behind this it's more likely Sony.
Japanese companies have little to no interest in PC gaming, Sony have nothing to do with anything PC or laptop related these days so having nothing to lose and the PS4 is the console that is pushing the idea that their hardware is something special.
It could all nonsense by a dev trolling PC gamers, or it could be Ubisoft passing the buck for any of their future games having a framerate cap.
Well, if it have been say by someone from UBI during an interview with a game reviewers site or whatever, i could take this fully seriously..
But all we have, is a report from someone who was in a presentation made by some Ubi guys in a game designer school in France.. whatever if it represent he's own opinion or not. A bit too much noise when you see from where it start.
I think if you actually owned a 120 hz screen you would realize it is not a placebo effect, the difference between 60 and 120 fps is definitely noticeable to some and the difference between 30 fps and 120 fps is just ridiculous.
Capping frame rates is just bad for everyone really, I mentioned in another thread that VR requires higher frame rates to reduce nausea so if a 30 fps cap becomes the norm Oculus Rift and Sony's Project Morpheus will suffer a major setback.
But the things they do put out they polish heavily and maintain properly.
You could basically state that Valve goes for quality over quantity.
I'd switch back from BF4 to CSGO if CSGO had more gametypes in a heartbeat.
I wouldn't disagree with that even if most of their games aren't to my own tastes.
My point though was that it's much easier to do that when there are alot less games that need supporting, and since this is pretty much a tech thread I find it disappointing how little they have done to push that side of PC gaming forward.
Perhaps. I'd definitely like to experience a 120Hz monitor but even if I happen to see a difference, I don't think I'd ever buy one. I think it largely depends on how the game (or video) is rendered/recorded. There are ways to make a 24Hz video feel very natural and smooth, even though the frame rate is actually quite abyssmal. There are games that can be played at 60FPS and you can EASILY spot individual key frames. It all depends on how the animation is done to make the experience seem smoother. Generally speaking, 120Hz would, in most cases, fix the possibility of ever noticing individual frames. But, that comes at the price of heavier expectancy of a GPU, a fancy monitor, and the possibility of getting headaches. When games are coded to make animations seem natural and smooth, 60FPS is plenty.
But nonetheless, I agree that there is really no good that can come out of capping frame rate.
I find it quite disappointing that people are accepting these accusations against MS (while completely ignoring the same accusations against Sony) without any proof what so ever. There's no proof at all that this person even had Ubi employees at their "school" as claimed. Seeing as how making such statements makes MS and Sony look bad, which would have a negative effect on console sales, which would result in a negative effect on game sales...... Why would a Ubi employee make such comments publicly?
Being that it involves Ubi, I fail to see how we have any evidence.....
Except that Ubi is accusing Sony of the exact same thing........
Yet there's no proof what so ever that these supposed claims from Ubi are true....
One of the problems with the hardware in the Xbone would be the slow RAM they chose to put in it. They could have put similar RAM to what the PS4 put in theirs and not have the Kinect from the start.
I agree for the most part that both MS and Sony got what they could get the best price for as far as hardware goes. But MS could have spend a tad more on the RAM as I stated above.
I never had any issues with headaches at 120hz but you can run 120hz screens at 60hz as well if you wanted to, personally I'd never go back everythings just that much smoother, for me the difference is well worth the extra hassle but I take your point it is a bit of a niche product right now and most of the time 60hz is perfectly fine, it is annoying when I read stories like this tho, I mean we spend time and money upgrading systems to basically be shat on from a great height I think something has to change here.
Epic, still have the disc somewhere in my living room, spared it for my HTPC
Maybe they would make that comment publicly because they are pissed off that M$ are telling them what to do? Game devs are not known for being fond of towing a party line. Are you trying to say that none of these events happened?
The article makes no mention of Sony, why are you saying Ubi is accusing Sony?
"He implied that MS is making them lock the framerate on PC too. Then, he smiled, said "But our eyes can't see past 24 fps anyway" and winked at me."
You fail to see any evidence? A Ubisoft developer has effectively said that M$ have done this. That is called first hand evidence!
I find it quite disappointing that people are happy getting butt f*cked my M$.
AMD came along with Mantle and suddenly M$ announce that they will effectively do the same thing in the next version of DirectX. This shows how little effort M$ are putting into DirectX, it takes an outside prod for anything to happen.
If a Linux alternative appeared to DirectX, you would be amazed what M$ could suddenly produce! A monopoly WILL be abused, this is the way of the world.
If this is all some kind of misunderstanding as you seem to suggest, I'm sure we'll see a nice statement from Ubi and maybe M$ explaining the truth. Let's just wait and see shall we?
Wow and LOL. It makes me think of when trains were invented and some people thought they would die because they would be travelling too fast.
You will buy a 120hz monitor because they will stop selling 60hz at some point in the (probably not too distant) future.
No, it's called hearsay
Pathetic. Why don't you get M$ and Ubisoft into court and resolve this then Perry?
Since the release of the 360 in 2004 (?) I've hated consoles. Not so much the games, but even then games already looked like low-res, low-fps, and especially extremely aliased garbage.
A funny story, an old friend of mine came by like a year ago and he saw some gameplay of BF 3 I think on my PC. He left PC gaming like when the 360 hit the market and he was actually baffled by the smoothness and quick reaction time of 60+ FPS.
He said like "Dude, this game is extremely smooth, I need it, what is it?" with me replying "Dude, it's not this game, it's called PC gaming" Something which he missed after playing for 10 years on CRAPPY hardware.
I don't believe all games from now on the PC are going to be locked to 30fps, big deal if 1 or 2 companys cap there games at 30fps, if all those who are moaning about these games boycott the companys rather than support them by buying the game on the PC. then maybe they will start to care?. hit them were it hurts and keep your money. or just buy an xbox one or the ps4 and be happy.
Nice edit lol...
But since you asked for it (originally): Hearsay definition - Information heard by one person about another. Hearsay is generally inadmissible as evidence in a court of law because it is based on the reports of others rather than on the personal knowledge of a witness.
A student at the school reported, that a Ubisoft employee said "He implied that MS is making them lock the framerate on PC too."
i remember when hardware seemed to be out pacing the software that used it, but now software seems to beable push the hardward to its limits, so hardware companys bring out more powerful hardware and thus the cycle carrys on ... this is where consoles fall flat on there faces, as by the time the console hardware is built and put in the public's hands the the hardware is old gen compared to GFX power PC can have, that can only leave game programers with the choice to cut down the game engines ability to do better, so consoles in tech terms is kind of catch 22.
so the day they put pen to paper in designing the new console the software engines that where about at the time made the design look good enuff although the game engines have more than lightly improved and need more gpu and cpu power to run them so by the time the console hits the market they now struggle to achieve what they hyped their customers to believe.
at the end of the day if you had a business model and sales looked like this :
new game sales (ps4/xboxone) 5 million sold (30fps cap due to hardware limits)
new game sales (PC) 1 million sales (no frame cap)
you can see were most the focus has gone, its all about the money.
im not saying this is how it is, although I wouldn't be surprised if that's how it turned out.
also out of the millions of PS4's and xbox ones sitting in peoples houses begging to be played on, how many of there owners are going to stop buying games because of 30fps cap and just use it as an expensive door stop? not many I can tell ya lol
to be fair 30fps on consoles is fine, it will not stop me from buying any game I like on the console format IMO... but on the PC WTF ? why did I spend so much money on building a high end GAMING PC ?
like I say I call the BS card that 30fps new standard for games, maybe for consoles yea although for all up and coming PC games BS.
take it to court then, as I said. If you don't believe the reporter, fine. Otherwise pathetic