Far Cry 4 on PS4, Xbox One Equivalent to PC Ultra High

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Something is seriously wrong with this statement. Well, except the "ultra high" part, someone is definitely ultra high at Ubisoft. :D

"But because we develop on PC, you’ve never really seen on console the ultra-high PC version before. So even out of the box, even day one, we just stuck the code on the new consoles and we were able to dial it all the way up. So as a console player you’re already getting by far the best version we can ship."
Click to expand...
 
Translation:
"We're shitting on the PC market again and nerfing the hell out of Far Cry 4's graphics just so we don't embarrass the next gen consoles. Suck it up and buy it like the good little lap dogs you are."
 
This would be fine at 720p 30fps. If it's 1080p/30 or 1080p/60 at Ultra equivalent then we've got a problem. I thought Far Cry 3 looked pretty good on PC, I can't imagine this being a downgrade.
 
Because that statement means anything at all considering 'ultra high' isnt a standard. Thus far it only means "the highest setting our GUI will let you use" which as of late with ubisoft, is a bitter subject
 
Something really wrong with that statement because if a Radeon 7790 (XONE) and a Radeon 7850 (PS4) are showcasing "ultra-high" graphics settings, that means the PC version will look no better than the console version at the same setting NO MATTER what video card is installed in the system.

Unless this is ultra-high at 720p at 30FPS locked on XONE and PS4, then the PC version will still look the same but do better at higher resolutions and frame rate. Likely yet unlikely at the same time.
 
Dear Ubisoft -- I saved myself 60 dollars *not* buying WatchDogs... I'm going to save myself another by *not* buying FarCry4.

What Ubisoft doesn't realize the main cause of piracy is Ubisoft themselves.
 
That's not some shit you want to admit to, ubisoft. That's like a teacher bragging that everyone in her class gets a C on every test. Keep on striving for mediocrity.
 
I don't see what the problem is. Think of how much better console players will feel about themselves.
 
It must hurt to know those shiny new consoles are using mid level graphics. Guess they are trying to pacify the console crowd so they think they are on the cutting edge. Not sure what Ubisoft is smoking though.....
 
This means is they are dumbing the PC version down. What's troubling is judging from their words, that means they will make it impossible to tweak the graphics.

All 3 system will run / look identical ... mark my words.
 
*sigh*

Here we go again. Can developers quit saying stupid shit out of their mouths, please? They know what they're saying is marketing hype and completely, and utterly, WRONG.
 
You're not sure what UBI is smoking?

I can tell you EXACTLY what they did ... they made a mistake by making those settings available ot the end PC user.

I can promise you, going forward, those settings will be hidden / disabled or all together removed and or blocked in the code. The days of turning on eye candy is quickly fading. Mark my words
 
Oh. In that case, I won't buy the game. Sorry, Ubi - this is dumb as shit. PC gamers know a thing or two.
 
I didn't buy Watchdogs because of the crap I just read and I sure as hell won't be buying Far Cry 4, ever, on sale / discounted, ever, period. I hate these fucking games they play
 
I think what this means is they've dialed back the ultra high settings on PC to create parity between the console and PC release. So in other words ultra high on PC isn't gonna look terribly impressive. about as good as what they can hope to produce on a PS4. XB1 shouldn't even be part of this conversation.
 
Oh great... that means my rig is going to hit 200fps and look really mediocre.
 
It sucks yes, but if the games good that wont stop me from picking it up and enjoying it.
 
you know the saying " dont bite the hand that feed you " , they are living off consoles, i do understand why they do what they do
what i dont get is ppl getting mad about it, persoanly i am very excited and supportive of Mantle API, SteamOS, PC need to become a platform, valve has what it take about 20 million prospects, Mantle gives the control and flexibility needed to make life easier for devs and cost efficient, if Mantle doesnt standarise i hope DX12 doesn't disapoint with half baked API, cryengine 10$ per month, UE4 20$.
doesnt matter what they do if pc gamers know what tech to support, pc gaming will take off, and hopefully we will see more ambitious projects like star citizen.
 
beside who cares about farcry a series that live off the reputation of the first far cry, but the farcry1 was developed by crytek and they did a good job at it.
farcry 2 sucked, farcry3 sucked even more, and the 4th hopefuly will be the one that burry it, some karma for taking the game from the studio that made it.
beside farcry4 uses dunia engine 2 the same one used on farcry3 and watch dogs, honestly not that good looking engine, and farcry 4 will probably have the same optimisation issues that farcry3 had and watch dogs have.
 
I just don't understand why everyone in a hardware enthusiast forum, you know; people you assume know things about hardware, expect $400 worth of hardware to compare to our $1000+ computers.

All things considered for the form factor and price they do a decent enough job. I know we would have liked a little more power, but it's still a major upgrade from the pervious consoles, and more power would have obviously cost more. Have to draw the line somewhere.

And no I'm not a console fan boy. Just saying... :p
 
Not at all surprising if Watch Dogs is any indicator of what to expect.
 
"Its going to look the same on consoles as it does on PC"

Whelp, that's all the proof we need now ladies and gents why Watch Dogs looks the way it does

I fucking give up, just write the whole company off as shit
 
King Icewind said:
I just don't understand why everyone in a hardware enthusiast forum, you know; people you assume know things about hardware, expect $400 worth of hardware to compare to our $1000+ computers.

All things considered for the form factor and price they do a decent enough job. I know we would have liked a little more power, but it's still a major upgrade from the pervious consoles, and more power would have obviously cost more. Have to draw the line somewhere.

And no I'm not a console fan boy. Just saying... :p
Click to expand...

I think you had a brain fart, no one here is saying anything about wanting to have same level quality for a pc and consoles. We are commenting on that even though we have $1000+ pc Ubisoft wants to make sure there is no difference.

Personally, I passed on Watchdogs and will now pass on Far Cry 4.
 
Well, at least they will continue to develop the CryEngine which other competient developers can use for really ultra looking games.
 
Thank god for star citizen. Won't have to concern myself with any of this EA / Ubi / Activision / Blizzard garbage anymore.
 
Console are always the limiting factor, it's been like this for the last 20 years almost. It's really nothing new. That just means that we'll run them in 4k with 1 card pretty soon
 
sonsonate said:
Can't seem to find any mention of the resolution...
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. Up-scaling perhaps? Or just dumbed down graphics? Maybe both. Good thing I don't give a shit about this game. I feel bad fr the PC folks that pay the extra money to get the most out of their games. If Ubi is trying to make the PC versions of their games less desirable on purpose they are doing a good job, because I probably won't buy any of their games ever again.
 
This is obviously in response to the Watch Dogs fiasco. At least we won't be blindsided this time. More like sideswiped.
 
Well, we are back at the Watch Dogs conspiracy theories again.

The next gen systems simply aren't. Ubisoft didn't know that when developing on the dev kits. Remember, they only knew they were going to be x86 APU's from AMD. MS and Sony were mum almost up to release as to what the actual console hardware was going to be. Ubisoft promised the world with a bunch of new IPs and returns of popular IPs on these platforms that were going to blow everyone away...except the platforms suck. Since Ubisoft moved a bunch of these 'next gen' machines on promises of their games that were going to push the envelope, they can't come out looking terrible next to a mid-range PC rig.

They are reacting to the Watch Dogs situation. We can read into this that the PC version will have all the goodies disabled, while being the same old poorly optimized dog and FC4 will be underwhelming on the 'next gen' systems as a graphical showcase. They are really stepping in it here though as FC3 is actually the only beautfiul and decently performing thing Ubi has released in recent years. If they do this, everyone will be able to turn around and point at FC3 PC and say, "So...how is it that this game looks worse, and runs worse than THAT, unless you crippled it for parity reasons because you made yourselves the vanguard for the 'next gen' systems and promised the world."
 
czerro said:
Well, we are back at the Watch Dogs conspiracy theories again.

The next gen systems simply aren't. Ubisoft didn't know that when developing on the dev kits. Remember, they only knew they were going to be x86 APU's from AMD. MS and Sony were mum almost up to release as to what the actual console hardware was going to be. Ubisoft promised the world with a bunch of new IPs and returns of popular IPs on these platforms that were going to blow everyone away...except the platforms suck. Since Ubisoft moved a bunch of these 'next gen' machines on promises of their games that were going to push the envelope, they can't come out looking terrible next to a mid-range PC rig.

They are reacting to the Watch Dogs situation. We can read into this that the PC version will have all the goodies disabled, while being the same old poorly optimized dog and FC4 will be underwhelming on the 'next gen' systems as a graphical showcase. They are really stepping in it here though as FC3 is actually the only beautfiul and decently performing thing Ubi has released in recent years. If they do this, everyone will be able to turn around and point at FC3 PC and say, "So...how is it that this game looks worse, and runs worse than THAT, unless you crippled it for parity reasons because you made yourselves the vanguard for the 'next gen' systems and promised the world."
Click to expand...

And secondly, you can see how this worked in development. Ubi is a huge studio with a bunch of popular IPs and was likely one of the first to be approached with dev kits. They were silly to make any promises when the dev kits were architectural in nature and obviously weren't going to be what shipped. But they DID make those promises based on 3+ years of projection, and they DID create a ton of expectation for these new systems. They have their foot in their mouth and the other in the opposite. I can only imagine how much the MS and Sony devs blanched at the Watch Dogs demo: "They get that was a dev kit we dropped them 3 years ago, right?! There's no way, right?! I mean...this is gonna be huge if they managed that...right?! See, I told you developers can make this work...right?!"

As much as they burned the early adopter they also burned MS and Sony by revealing just how weak the systems are. They gotta save face somewhere. PC base, or every other platform base and making MS and Sony happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top