-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Eurogamer - PS4 Pro gives Battlefield 1 gamers a multiplayer advantage
- Thread starter Coxy100
- Start date
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Your understanding of the policy is poor. That is the gist of it. Both PS4s target 60fps. The Pro just does it more consistently.
Maintenance
Member
Isn't Forza Horizon 3 crossplay? One might argue that the game can barely run at 60fps, but it does if you have a powerful enough PC, isn't that the same thing? Or you can't race against your friends?
Variance is the drops, the fluctuation in framerate and thus a fluctuation in input lag and responsiveness.
How so?
Why wouldn't you consider that an advantage IF you can play the Switch online docked with LAN versus someone using it as a WiFi handheld?
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Forza Horizon 3 is 30fps on console.
Maintenance
Member
Yes, and 60fps on PC. As far as I recall, crossplay enabled.
You could argue that the PS4 version falls so short of that target that it might as well have been capped at 30. I mean judging from those DF videos it rarely ever hits 60.
Going from there, the Pro gives you a real advantage, since the 60fps target actually makes sense on that system.
rochellepaws
Member
This is a ridiculous retort and clearly not what was meant by the statement. Anything can be targeted with failure to reach that target, the statement referenced actual performance and further emphasized there would be no advantage.
Either Sony PR chose to intentionally mislead or there is a problem here which must be resolved, I'd imagine it's the latter and we'll see a patch to fix it.
VE3TRO
Formerly Gizmowned
What about the other consoles and adjusting graphical options like FOV, DOF, motion blur? Surely these all take into effect what FPS the player gets as well.
I can't remember what game it was but there was a game last gen which actually penalized people who had better internet so they were more inline with the people who had bad connections but they made it worse and gave too much of a disadvantage so those with the worse connections actually got the advantage lol.
I can't remember what game it was but there was a game last gen which actually penalized people who had better internet so they were more inline with the people who had bad connections but they made it worse and gave too much of a disadvantage so those with the worse connections actually got the advantage lol.
Come one DF, I love y'all and you're my most watched channel on YT.
This though, is just stirring the pot and asking for devs to artificially introduce Framerate parity.
In essence you're asking for devs to not utilise the CPU advantage of the Pro and sabotage games that SHOULD run better on more powerful hardware.
Sure you're not explicitly stating what I just said but things like this are what sparks gamers to get up in arms and sway developers decisions. We all just bought the Pro for a reason. To enjoy slightly higher framerates, to enjoy prettier IQ and better shadows etc. Stuff like this will only serve to take one of the reasons we be bought a Pro away from us. What's the point in drilling in a thing that everyone was fine with in the first place?
Also if a game targets 60 but hits 45 and the pro hits 60 a lot more, it's not really an advantage, maybe devs should put the extra effort in on the OG.
This though, is just stirring the pot and asking for devs to artificially introduce Framerate parity.
In essence you're asking for devs to not utilise the CPU advantage of the Pro and sabotage games that SHOULD run better on more powerful hardware.
Sure you're not explicitly stating what I just said but things like this are what sparks gamers to get up in arms and sway developers decisions. We all just bought the Pro for a reason. To enjoy slightly higher framerates, to enjoy prettier IQ and better shadows etc. Stuff like this will only serve to take one of the reasons we be bought a Pro away from us. What's the point in drilling in a thing that everyone was fine with in the first place?
Also if a game targets 60 but hits 45 and the pro hits 60 a lot more, it's not really an advantage, maybe devs should put the extra effort in on the OG.
This post took me back...to my CS poverty days haha.
Unless the PS4 version of BF1 is some sub-30 fps slog I find it hard to care that much about this. If anything I would be annoyed that you don't have access to graphical settings so you could lessen some of the post processing, increasing visibility. Which you already can on PC.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
It's not misleading. Some of us have been telling you all this is how it would work for months. There will be no patch to fix anything because it is not broken. On the fucking PS4 Pro box it says Pro will provide better framerates. The parity statement NEVER meant the PS4 Pro version had to be gimped to have the same framerate issues as the base model.
Titanfall 2 runs better on the Pro for MP. Just a boy guaranteed thst COD does as well. This the status quo going forward. They might as well scrap the Pro if they introduce this parity you seem.
😂 😂 😂 😂 😂
rochellepaws
Member
Balance and a level playing field is generally the priority for a competitive multiplayer mode. It's also Sony's stated aim for multiplayer modes for the Pro, why would you expect different? You might want different and enjoy the competitive advantage over the masses but I'm sure you understand what this setup would do to the community.
Toadthemushroom
Member
I understand the policy, but I was approaching it in the wrong way. You make a good point. I mean, ideally the PS4 would be able to switch between PS4 mode and Base Mode instantly, but like the New 3DS, that's just not possible - it's set as soon as you launch the game.
So as long as the game's code contains the same framerate cap on both it's technically identical code between both formats, and it'd be hard to maintain the same level of performance on both without hampering both (i.e. 30fps cap on both to ensure that the framerate is rock solid and identical across Base and Pro hardware).
So because it happens on PC it's ok? Nah, it's not on, especially when people are paying to play MP games on console.
That's exactly what was meant, those who fully understood the statement read it as saying:
"if a game targets 30 on the OG, it cannot target 60 on the pro. However, if a game is advertised as targeting 60 on the OG but fails to hit that target, the Pro hitting 60 more often does not constitute as an advantage as both are TARGETING 60".
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Nope. Chop the base PS4 version up until it looks like dog shit if that is what takes to get the framerate up. That is what you do to prioritize framerate.
Straight Edge
Member
Wrong BF1 thread. A statement as to what is going on with the PRO version post patch.
rochellepaws
Member
Better framerates for single player games, yes. Not better framerates for multiplayer games while matched with PS4 players running on inferior framerates. This was also communicated by Naughty Dog's Christian Gyrling as a restriction placed by Sony.
It's of course logical, as the opposite would decimate PS4 online competitive communities.
thelastword
Banned
There was an even playing field relative to framerate and graphical settings before on consoles, that much is certain and true, but things have been changing with the introduction of crossplay. look at SF5 on PS4+PC, it's not exactly an even field, but spouting an advantage is not something inherent with having better hardware. I have better hardware, but have a shitty connection or even a good connection, does not mean I will have a good time with a guy playing on a shitty computer at 30fps on WIfi. Hell I just had that match and could do nothing to that guy, he won. I do think your connection is a larger player in how you perform in online games tbh....
At this point, a better study would be how does lower vs higher framerates really affect you online, I'm thinking both players can use their hardware capabilities to their advantage. The crazy thing about online is that a million things will affect the outcome of a match outside of framerate and framerate is not the biggest deterrent.
I think I said as much in one my posts above. No matter how you slice it better hardware should perform better in both SP and MP, it's the nature of the beast.
My problem isn't with Leadbetter calling for better performance in PRO vs OG PS4, my problem is the inconsistency with which he decides to make a point of contention. if his motif is that better hardware should not be under-performing against weaker hardware, I'm all for it, I believe that too...so I'd have liked for him to have drawn a stink when this same BF1 performed better on XB1 vs the PS4 (both SP AND MP), also, when the XB1 performed better in RER2 by at least 20 fps etc.....You don't do one without the other, because it would seem you are only conveniently calling such issues out.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
I don't see the issue. If you are releasing a better console then you are releasing a better console.
But, the performance of the game should be rock solid on any version. Which sadly most devs don't give a fuck about these days.
But, the performance of the game should be rock solid on any version. Which sadly most devs don't give a fuck about these days.
It only falls that short of the target in the 64 player modes. All the smaller modes are actually almost locked 60 on standard PS4.
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
This is why there are no competitive multiplayer games on PC.
rochellepaws
Member
Do you believe it is profitable or in any way desirable for EA to make the version the vast majority of their customers will play to look like "dog shit"?
The Pro will be compromised for multiplayer, best get used to it now. If you're unhappy with that then perhaps PC gaming is more for you.
Lion Heart
Banned
Imagine the shitstorm if Pro dropped like the OG. God I hate Eurogamer.
EA is giving OG users a disadvantage, not Sony.
EG is playing both sides of the field, stating how WD2 dropping a few frames is"absolutely disappointing" now the game that performs better they still give it shit. Man they are simply shameless.
EA is giving OG users a disadvantage, not Sony.
EG is playing both sides of the field, stating how WD2 dropping a few frames is"absolutely disappointing" now the game that performs better they still give it shit. Man they are simply shameless.
Toadthemushroom
Member
I think Leadbetter is right to call out different aspects of how Pro developers handle things. Just because he analyses/criticises one of them doesn't negate the other. I mean, if he asked another member of the team to do exactly the same thing, would it be okay just because they aren't Leadbetter? Or am I misunderstanding your point?
Oh, ok
Though both DF and NX Gamer have reported that nothing has really changed other than a new AA solution.
Oh shit. The amount of people who want devs to artificially introduce frame drops on Pro are staggering. What happens when the PS5 releases and it's probably cross compatible?
BF1 does hit 60FPS on the OG, Pro just hits it more often, that is not an advantage as both have the capability of hitting 60FPS as ADVERTISED.
BF1 does hit 60FPS on the OG, Pro just hits it more often, that is not an advantage as both have the capability of hitting 60FPS as ADVERTISED.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
That is your interpretation and it is wrong. Only the targets must be equal, not the fluctuations. Downgrading the PS4 version until the framerate can go up is the only acceptable way to remedy this it were to happen at all. I fully expected better performance in Battlefield 1 when I ordered my Pro. It was a driving force behind me being an early adopter.
GHG
Gold Member
Sun Bather
Member
But Sony told me this wouldn't happen!
(can not believe anyone believed that lol).
(can not believe anyone believed that lol).
Donny Hayabusa
Member
Can anybody tell me why hdr is an advantage? I thought the post was a joke, but a Lot of people quote him on that.
And do you think it's profitable or in any way desirable for Sony to have its newer, more powerful console play games just the way they do on the older, less powerful one in MP?
Do you think that would make people want to buy the Pro?
thelastword
Banned
Eh you jest, but it's true........ but is what leadbetter implying so detrimental to regular play....?
I remember that the best scores in the tutorial sections in COD Modern Warfare was on PS3. People said the 360 was the best fps controller, it had better framerates yadda yadda yadda yadda. The persons to have pulled up the most points in bayonetta and the most extended combos on that game were on the shitty PS3 version with sub 30fps. as well
Not saying worse framerates is not a disadvantage, but is that why you were just decimated?
This and input lag on TV/screen what controller you have if you have a Good headset to here enemies etc etc.
jabberwocker
Banned
Did they even say during an interview after the conference that there could be a small benefit to multiplayer in this case but it wouldn't be that big. I mean it's not a big surprise. Higher resolutions going to give a better drawl distance no matter what. Frame rates will always fluctuate. Hit boxes will always be the same though. I wouldn't think it's that Big of a deal.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Get used to this disappointment you feel right now because you feel it for the rest of the generation unless you buy a Pro too. This is a closed case.
Yea, it will be amplified even more.