Ubisoft engineer says Microsoft & Sony pressuring them 30fps on PC

Denial

2014-10-15 15:25

So this is a random redditor's interpretation of what some lowly ubisoft employee probably never said. He doesn't even quote anything specifically. And of all places it's posted to PCMasterRace which is a giant circlejerk anyway. Sorry but a more reliable source is required for me.

#4938006

Denial

2014-10-15 15:36

^ your username and that post , perfect fit.. i don't know what more is needed , of course i understand you but still i think its pretty obvious that there is some truth in this.

People have been saying this kinda stuff for years "consoles hold graphics in PC gaming back" and yet in all those years only one title that I can think of shipped PC only and blew everything else out of the water -- that was Crysis. Oh and it sold like crap. This doesn't even mention that there have been multiple console ports that aren't capped at 30fps. So what, is Microsoft asking nicely? Please guys cap it at 30fps?! Again considering the source I just have a hard time believing it. The stuff they post to that subreddit is next generation retarded in 99.9% of cases.

#4938017

TeX_UK

2014-10-15 15:45

I read an article on the Forbes mag website a couple of months ago & according to them PC massively out sells console in platform & game sales so I can see game devs eventually telling M$ & Sony to sling there hooks as they make far more money from PC game sales.

#4938081

Solfaur

2014-10-15 16:53

I doubt that this is true, but then again the new consoles were obsolete tech wise from the start (exspecially the xbox), so it would not be that unlikely for companies to try to use such lame tricks to lengthen the life of those products.

#4938096

Andrew LB

2014-10-15 17:06

^^^ 92% of PC game sales are digital. A little known fact published by Forbes not too long ago when they announced PC gaming was the global market leader. Also, any PC game that gets locked at 30fps will not be purchased by me. I'm not saying I wont play it... I just wont pay for it.

#4938106

The Laughing Ma

2014-10-15 17:36

PC gamers need to raise a massive sh1tstorm because of this.

Why? Given how much flack that Ubisoft is taking of late for a). Their piss poor PC conversion of Watchdogs combined with b). Their inability to give a press release that doesn't contain pure stupidity about why their games run like they do. This sounds an awful lot like Ubisoft trying to pass the buck. Also if MS and Sony are holding so much sway with developers and the quality of their games output then why are the folk behind Project Cars aiming for 1080p and 60Fps across the board? Seems to fly in the face of the console makers forcing developers to downgrade their cross platform releases.

MS and Sony can both benefit from this because if a product is the same or similar across the board then the idea is more people will just buy the console versions.

Really? People buy the PC version of a game because it runs at a better frame rate? Of the reasons to buy a PC version over a console that is... well it doesn't even rate on the list of reasons. - Cheaper price - Easier to get hold of (Steam downloads are way way faster than PSNs) - Better community support - Better control interface (certain games driving and shooting) - Mod support, easily the biggest reason given that pretty much every game on PC ends up with some sort of modding community vs nothing on the consoles

#4938109

Denial

2014-10-15 17:39

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crysis#Sales You are literally just making things up. Please stop posting your BS.

Rofl, OK maybe I should clarify because obviously inferring basic context from my post is too much to ask for. The entire argument is PC vs Console: Crysis was obviously one of the most hyped games of all time leading up to it's launch and it was by far and away the best game to showcase an example of PC gaming as a whole. And yet despite both those things it was one of the most pirated games of that year and doesn't even make the incomplete top 50 list of best selling games of all time. By comparison Call of Duty Advanced Warfare is predicted to sell 17 million copies in 3 months. Compared to Crysis's 3 million copies in 3 years. So yeah, crap sales. And suddenly the idea of companies preferring console sales/both to PC sales becomes clear.

#4938110

danfim

2014-10-15 17:41

Remember when everyone thought we would get quality PC ports because of the "next-gen" consoles? NOPE

#4938117

schmidtbag

2014-10-15 17:49

Remember when everyone thought we would get quality PC ports because of the "next-gen" consoles? NOPE

Anyone who thought that had desperate expectations. Obviously PC ports would be better, since these consoles are based on x86, support newer APIs, and are just simply more powerful than last-gen. But otherwise, game developers will always take the easy way out unless they care more about the customer than their wallets.

#4938133

danfim

2014-10-15 18:03

Anyone who thought that had desperate expectations. Obviously PC ports would be better, since these consoles are based on x86, support newer APIs, and are just simply more powerful than last-gen. But otherwise, game developers will always take the easy way out unless they care more about the customer than their wallets.

Right you are.

#4938135

ScoobyDooby

2014-10-15 18:10

Rofl, OK maybe I should clarify because obviously inferring basic context from my post is too much to ask for. The entire argument is PC vs Console: Crysis was obviously one of the most hyped games of all time leading up to it's launch and it was by far and away the best game to showcase an example of PC gaming as a whole. And yet despite both those things it was one of the most pirated games of that year and doesn't even make the incomplete top 50 list of best selling games of all time. By comparison Call of Duty Advanced Warfare is predicted to sell 17 million copies in 3 months. Compared to Crysis's 3 million copies in 3 years. So yeah, crap sales. And suddenly the idea of companies preferring console sales/both to PC sales becomes clear.

The piracy excuse is nothing but that, an excuse. Not to discount it entirely, yes its a problem, but it is on console too. No, Crysis sold poorly because its more a tech demo than a game. You know why people pirated it? To stress test their hardware and then go and play actual games. Call of Duty is a stupid comparison since at the time Advanced Warfare was a step up in the COD series featuring a whole new take and was the last iteration of CoD to feature dedicated servers. It was in fact the last CoD I played, but I played the hell out of CoD4 for years. I imagine it was the same for many other players. And if those players DID want to play multiplayer, they needed to purchase the game. Makes sense to me!

#4938156

siriq

2014-10-15 18:31

What is really worry's me : console makers are pressuring them into doing the same thing on PC Hail to the next-gen or should i call no-gen consoles?!

#4938159

schmidtbag

2014-10-15 18:35

Oh to hell with both 30fps AND 60fps! I want 120fps support! I don't do 60Hz/fps unless I am forced. There should be neither 30fps lock nor 60fps lock! Instead - NO LOCK! I think about the only lock I am OK with is the V-Sync lock that some games, like Skyrim, require in order to play properly.

While I don't think there should ever be a cap on FPS, I don't see 120FPS or higher ever being necessary. Since I personally never used a 120Hz+ monitor myself, I can't rightly say that wanting such a high refresh rate is dumb. However, like many pricey luxuries, you only THINK the experience is better because that's what your wallet tells you. It's like a wine snob being given a $10 bottle while being told it's worth $500 and they they believe it is worth every penny.

#4938163

rl66

2014-10-15 18:38

I don't see how this could possibly be true. There are less than a handful of games that ran at 60 frames last gen and almost none that ran at 60 frames at 1080p. Most games this gen have been 30 frames too except for indie games and remakes of last gen games. Sony literally has nothing to gain from doing this.

this way of doing last since long time: EA was a master in limit PC game to make console game look better (because there is more buy and it cost more). alice madness return, the sim 2, reckoning... all of those are fps or/and res limited. Once modded they look... hmm like when it was presented to public lol BTW on computer you can ALWAYS mod the game (if you don't know how there is some website with everything already done, just to download... google or Yandex is your friend (despite he spy you 😛uke2:)

#4938168

danfim

2014-10-15 18:47

Excuse me. I've been saying from the beginning, that the next gen consoles were not going to change a thing. So far, I have been right.

To be fair, the ports might actually have become even worse on average. 🙂

#4938200

Brasky

2014-10-15 19:16

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crysis#Sales You are literally just making things up. Please stop posting your BS.

+1 :3eyes:

#4938217

goat1

2014-10-15 19:37

MS and Sony can both benefit from this because if a product is the same or similar across the board then the idea is more people will just buy the console versions. If this carries on, then, basically there's little point in upgrading your PC because our games will only run at 30fps anyway. The real problem ofcourse is the PS4 and X1 are both under-powered and already maxed-out by current games compared to where PC gfx are at and so we will have to wait years before PC games are actually PC standard again.

This is exactly right. The exec's are pandering to the console. Sony doesn't care about PC's,and why should they? Microsoft cares about their operating system. They look at the Xbox like Jerry Jones looks at the Cowboys. Its their toy,their obsession. The PC is only going to slow down the Xbox. Games used to be made for the PC 1st then ported to the console,now its the other way around and because of that,PC games get severely gimped. Sure,there might be a few examples of good ports,but there are far and few between.

#4938220

boodikon

2014-10-15 19:39

Shame on them if true which I doubt, make the best they can on current consoles then improve for the better tech in high end pc's

#4938222

Corrupt^

2014-10-15 19:42

If I was a game developer I would say no to both Sony and MS about limiting PC games to 30fps and continue to make them 60fps. Why should Pc gamers suffer if their console counter part can't do 60fps on a consistent basis.

Look at Valve's engine. They solved the problem of physics not being the same speed with different tickrates. They have 64 and 128 tickrate. Something tells me that it would be possible to do 32 with the same speed in physics as well with some adjustments. Basically you design your game with a world that runs at a 128 tickrate (128 updates/sec) and you can scale all the way down to 32... The sheer stupidity in gamedevelopment makes me facepalm.

#4938273

goat1

2014-10-15 20:24

Shame on them if true which I doubt, make the best they can on current consoles then improve for the better tech in high end pc's

It is true.. The PC is just an afterthought now. They do just enough to port that game to the PC to make it decent. Most developers don't take the time to really concentrate on PC's. I think there are a few that still do,but most of the games by EA/Ubi ect.. Have a bottom line and put a time frame on the ports to PC. I can almost guarantee that!