Honestly this is going to get ugly over here based on this thread, if XSX games keep up, all hell will break loose.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Jason Schreier (Kotaku Splitscreen) : "Sony will have PS5 only titles at launch"
- Thread starter Dust
- Start date
Fair enough, no need to be hostile. I just find it odd since this thread is filled with many more replies to this thread are in favor of Sony's strategy
I'll say again what i said in that other thread, this is not true that launch software are not pushing the consoles, they are actually pushing them in unreasonable way to impress!
Exemple of games that have been developed with crazy tech in mind to show a generational gap: Drive Club, The order.. Those games actually did things that later games didn't do, cause they were all about showing off. You could totally add resogun to that list for exemple.
2 things shouldn't be confused i think, production value and tech!! Maybe you will need 2-3 years to have crazy production value titles, with ton of content and animations etc... But you don't need to wait that long to have smaller games that pushes crazy techs. To the contrary, we should expect that cause that's the best way to create a clear difference right out of the gate.
Last edited:
One idea I read for utilization of the PS5's SSD I thought was interesting was adding flying mounts in Horizon 2.
Both for insanely fast fast travel (think robotic super sonic jet) and also being able to use them for aerial attacks in large scale battles where draw distance, NPC count on the ground, lod etc would really matter for gameplay when you're flying from above.
Both for insanely fast fast travel (think robotic super sonic jet) and also being able to use them for aerial attacks in large scale battles where draw distance, NPC count on the ground, lod etc would really matter for gameplay when you're flying from above.
Its not just about graphics. PS5 exclusives are going to be doing mechanically that aren't possible on PS4 due to the memory, SSD, and CPU.
Yea I don't disagree that these early games will obviously be trying to showcase next gen.The point I was trying to make is that the leap from end of gen releases (TLOU2) as compared to early gen releases (KZ:SF or inFamous) is almost as big as what we're likely going to see releasing in the next year on these new consoles.
Maybe my expectations are lower than most here
I hope every one can keep calm and of it ends up being that ps5 launch games are close to series x games that people eat crowd humbly and not be weird about it.
Jesus Christ. They used the touchpad because they had to. It wasn't optional much like how devs were forced to shoehorn in Sixaxis or Kinect in the previous generation.
You are comparing a controller feature to hardware features like ray tracing and that's just insane. Absolutely insane.
It's not easy. Do you remember some of the trainwreck cross-gen games we had in 2014? Shadow of Mordor ran at like 15 FPS on the PS3/360 and the big feature it was sold on, the Nemesis System, was completely cut out.
Scaling is only possible to a point.
Tlou2 do look waaay better than early ps4 games, but if you look at last gen. Early PS4 games Shadowfall and Infamous also look a generation ahead from late PS3 game like TLoU.
I think even early PS5 games will definitely shows the generation gap, especially with raytracing
Well the specific cases of Drive Club or the Order are showing that you can have games that will max out some of the tech right away actually cause they go bold with it and design with limitations in mind to reach those tech goals. I don't see that many racing games nowadays with global illumination and dynamic volumetric sky changing the light.. That was crazy. I don't see that many PS4 games with this kind of detail and light in interiors neither.
So yeah what i'm saying is i heard a lot of people claiming launch doesn't need exclusive generational games cause launch games don't push hardware anyway.
That's a lie. At launch you go full tech demo.
And it was always the case. Try to port Tekken Tag Tournament on PS1 for a laugh, or F-Zero on NES ?
Releasing next gen exclusives on next gen consoles only became 'anti-consumer' once Microsoft said they would have no next gen exclusives.
The biggest facilitator of a different next-gen experience will be the SSDs.
Do you folks remember Far Cry 2? Do you remember the complaint that the vehicles were so slow? The vehicles were slow in Far Cry 2 because the game could not keep up with loading the world.
We can only speculate how that would impact other games. But if you look at a game like Days Gone, the bike is oddly slow in that game, and the game still has a lot of performance issues. Days Gone looks like it tries to mediate this issue with similar design to something like Destiny, wherein much of the world is cordoned off into smaller sections, giving each time to load as the player passes through.
Despite making the bike slow, and offering a relatively constrained open world setting, Days Gone still has issues with its performance, particularly as the bike becomes faster in the late-game areas.
On the PS5 those games could break free of those design limitations (hopefully). We could see faster and more realistic traversal in a title like Days Gone, with more realistic landscapes that didn't need to be stitched together in such an unnatural way.
If you're tied to old hardware, you can't change the game like that. You can make the game perform and look better, but you can't change the core design (e.g. the structure of the open world, or the speed of traversal). Which means that your titles are fundamentally being designed for old hardware.
Do you folks remember Far Cry 2? Do you remember the complaint that the vehicles were so slow? The vehicles were slow in Far Cry 2 because the game could not keep up with loading the world.
We can only speculate how that would impact other games. But if you look at a game like Days Gone, the bike is oddly slow in that game, and the game still has a lot of performance issues. Days Gone looks like it tries to mediate this issue with similar design to something like Destiny, wherein much of the world is cordoned off into smaller sections, giving each time to load as the player passes through.
Despite making the bike slow, and offering a relatively constrained open world setting, Days Gone still has issues with its performance, particularly as the bike becomes faster in the late-game areas.
On the PS5 those games could break free of those design limitations (hopefully). We could see faster and more realistic traversal in a title like Days Gone, with more realistic landscapes that didn't need to be stitched together in such an unnatural way.
If you're tied to old hardware, you can't change the game like that. You can make the game perform and look better, but you can't change the core design (e.g. the structure of the open world, or the speed of traversal). Which means that your titles are fundamentally being designed for old hardware.
That's a good point. But what makes you think Halo Infinite is not going to take full use of XSX hardware when Matt Booty has said as much? It's their tent pole title launching with new hardware. Regardless of MS decision to do cross-gen for the first couple of years, they are going to want to show off what next-gen is capable of. There can still be modes or feature that are only possible on next gen hardware.
I didn't talk about XSX at all lol, i hope they show off their tech to, what i'm saying is they better do, and people trying to minimize the importance of doing so are wrong.
I think that too. I really can't wait for these full console and game reveals so this forum can be a little more positive and excited to play these games. Right now people are focused on "right and wrong" strategies when we haven't even seen what the games look like (or know what games are even slated to come out in the launch window)
Is this some am chair developer thing to look specifically for "slow" games and argue how these games are held up by not having an SSD without having any engine performance metrics or profiling data?
I think Sony gave a bad example with Spiderman and the "speed" in the game. The SSDs in next gen consoles will mean so much more.
Jesus, people have insane expectations about PS5 launch titles. Remember all the PS3 launch titles that did things X360 couldn't because PS3 had blu-ray?
In fairness. This is the only strategy sony can take to be different to microsofts approach. One is pro consumer. One is anti consumer.
Loading time differences are easier to demo than asset streaming pipeline. Bit like graphics are easier to show off than FPS.
I do think that developers do need to go back and make changes to their engines to fully leverage SSD speeds as now they are made also with a lot slower HDDs in mind. Star Citizen is good example of game designed around SSDs.
Oh, I believe so, too! But I also feel that we see real good SSD utilization not right after launch but at least two years after launch. Fast main storage also took time for "real" programs on a computer to be properly used as many programs always had iowait in mind, like data bases, for example.
I don't think it's such a bad exemple if you see in term of game design and not just tech. It's not just that it's faster, it allows different stuff, like i would guess missions that lets you use the city in a more fluid and large way, it can have all sort of consequences on the game content.
The main bottleneck of the PS4 is the CPU, and Horizon is a sandbox game. Its possible they built the sequel around greater world simulation abilities of the PS5. And there's nothing wrong with that... we buy new consoles so that we can have new experiences.
I think we're more or less stating the same thing. I only brought up the XSX because of your comment about it being a lie that games don't need to be generation exclusive because they won't take advantage of hardware. I think MS has that part figured out and wouldn't be aiming to be "most powerful" if they thought this would hamstring their own first party titles.
Do you not see the connection? They promoted the tech they were told to. Now its haptic feedback, HW Raytracing and Audio Ray Tracing. Is it hard for you to comprehend what Im saying? They will create games at launch to highlight them. Mark Cerny has already talked RT audio, do you honestly believe launch games from them wont use that? When they have stated even normal TV speakers can benifit?
They get told to promote A, B or C to be a market differentiator from last gen.
They do it.
Now they will do it again.
Dont be fixated at the exact words I used, read the analogy between them.
I mean, look at Star Citizen and you get an idea what kind of stuff is suddenly possible if devs mandate a SSD + mid-high end CPU for a game. And still people pretend all that what Star Citizen does - running on a planets while at the same time there's a massive dogfight in the planet's orbit for example - is still possible on a PC with a low end netbook CPU + 5400 rpm HDD if you just meddle with the settings. And I guarantee you that they'll tell you the very same about the first batch of PS5 games.
Posters in this thread and the Booty thread have said and continue to say that developing games to work exclusively for a new console is "anti-consumer".
It stands out because it's ridiculous.
I think the Spider-man demo was something that could be shown to people without getting too technical. "lets show you a game you all know and see the impact it has on it". I think it worked in that regards.
There seems to be a severe misunderstanding here about PC development & the ranges of devices on PC gaming. PC scaling exists *within a finite range*. Just because you can brute force HW to run something lower than the minimum required spec doesn't mean scaling limits don't exist. Just because a game can run on potato HW & a super GPU does not mean limits don't exist. The game was designed with that potato HW in mind. Limitations were placed on the scope in order to make sure it could run on the absolute minimum they provided.
Please stop calling later up-ports cross gen. That is not what a cross generational title is. A remaster is not cross gen. A port to new HW is not cross gen. Dark Cloud is not a cross gen game bc they ported it to PS4. It's just a PS2 game you can play on PS4.
Also, please stop using switch ports as examples of games being arbitrarily next gen only just because. Both TW3 & Doom run on respective minimum PC specs, and still required tons of effort to cut back everything possible to get them to run on the Switch. As impressive as those games are they still accounted for severely lower HW in their design. First party games on the other hand do not. God of War is likely an impossible switch port. It does not account for a minimum PC spec. It has one single spec it accounts for. There are things you can do in design when you can account for *every single device* the end product will be used on.
It's easy to say launch titles could've just ran on last gen with some elbow grease & a prayer before you see them. How about we exercise some caution & patience and see what's being presented before making such claims.
And as for 3rd party, aside from the general outcry of gamers to "drop cross gen already" very early this gen, you'd be surprised at the speed at which big 3rd party publishers made their first next gen only games
2014
- Ubisoft
2015
- EA
- WB
- Bethesda
- 2K
2016
- SE
- Bamco
- Activision/Blizzard
Please stop calling later up-ports cross gen. That is not what a cross generational title is. A remaster is not cross gen. A port to new HW is not cross gen. Dark Cloud is not a cross gen game bc they ported it to PS4. It's just a PS2 game you can play on PS4.
Also, please stop using switch ports as examples of games being arbitrarily next gen only just because. Both TW3 & Doom run on respective minimum PC specs, and still required tons of effort to cut back everything possible to get them to run on the Switch. As impressive as those games are they still accounted for severely lower HW in their design. First party games on the other hand do not. God of War is likely an impossible switch port. It does not account for a minimum PC spec. It has one single spec it accounts for. There are things you can do in design when you can account for *every single device* the end product will be used on.
It's easy to say launch titles could've just ran on last gen with some elbow grease & a prayer before you see them. How about we exercise some caution & patience and see what's being presented before making such claims.
And as for 3rd party, aside from the general outcry of gamers to "drop cross gen already" very early this gen, you'd be surprised at the speed at which big 3rd party publishers made their first next gen only games
2014
- Ubisoft
2015
- EA
- WB
- Bethesda
- 2K
2016
- SE
- Bamco
- Activision/Blizzard
But we now have posters here looking for slow games already as if the reason was only the slow HDD. It's misleading at best.
While I think BC is a huge thing for gaming, I also do want a new console to have exclusives and show off what the hardware can do. Too much now getting a new console doesn't amount to much, whereas in back in the day it meant everything depending on what console you had and what games you could play because of your choice.
I think you shouldnt blame Sony for how people want to interpret things. I think that everyone who put a bit of thought into it knows how this will be a massive change for gamedesign in general, not just for speeding up open world games.
I can only really speak for this thread, but as I mentioned I have barely seen anyone state that what Sony is doing is anti-consumer in a non-facetious manner. The overwhelming amount of responses are applauding this strategy. If anything, some are saying MS's strategy is more "pro-consumer". That is not the same as stating what Sony is doing is anti-consumer
But MS basically needs to do cross gen or they risk cutting off content to their GP subscribers, some of which (me) are locked into the service for years. Sony is not chasing subscribers, they want people to people to upgrade to their new ecosystem ASAP since the bulk of their revenue will be around game sales on these new consoles
Oh, I don't blame Sony in this case, they can't be responsible for the actions of their fan base.
I think everybody's making too big a deal out of this, both approaches make sense for different reasons, and we haven't really seen any games yet. I'm a little disappointed this kind of misplaced anxiety has overtaken rationality.
But isn't that because the game was designed for baseline consoles?
lol I love when people dont know how game dev works and keep using this as an example.
Switch is a solid state console and has almost 8x the memory as the PS3.
So no. I don't think the Witcher 3 would be able to run on the PS3 (or Horizon).
Its also half the memory as the base consoles which the game was designed around. Existing on a significantly weaker hardware does not mean its not a true next gen game or wasn't ambitious.
No, they are a PC developer who is trying to see how they can get the game running on the base systems and what resolution. I expect sub 30fps on Xbox One at times
Speculative, after-the-fact,-dedicated porting processes - what Witcher on Switch was - are one thing.
Accommodating a lower powered platform for day and date release with other versions is another.
I would be very hesitant to say that if Switch had been a part of the day one platform targets for the Witcher, that the game we ended up with would have been exactly the same. That that requirement would have had no impact on the game's development or the scope the devs went with.
I think here most people are talking about accommodating platforms for day and date release - not allocating resources after the fact to explore if a dedicated downport of a next-gen game will work or not, and releasing the game if it does. Which is the situation that happened with the Witcher on Switch. It is not proof, at all, of the easy scalability of games or the 'end' of the need to worry about performance targets when designing games.
GameXplain did a video on Microsoft & Sony's approach to how they release software going into the next generation. They seem to heavily favor Microsoft's approach.
The Far Cry 2 thing was something a friend working at Ubisoft mentioned to me. We were talking about the next gen systems and how they'd be shipping with SSDs and he started talking about instances where the games his studio had worked on had been limited by read speed, he said that they chose to make the vehicles slower because of the read speeds from HDD/CD. The point is that it can demonstrably affect the core design of a game, it's not just some 'arm chair developer thing'.