45 réponses à ce sujet

[Majestic Jazz]

Okay, if there is any good news about the holiday 2016/spring 2017 release window is the possibility that Bioware will have the extra time to give ME:A the best visual representation. All last generation a lot of developers kept saying that it was difficult to make a 1080p/60fps game on the technology of the PS3 and Xbox 360. It seems like developers are still sticking to that excuse now with the X1 and PS4 and I am not buying it. Many current gen games are pushing the boundaries such as Halo 5 which will be 1080p/60fps and so on. Also in terms of the Frostbite, Bioware had DAI to test things out, Star Wars Battlefront is providing extra "testing" and details. So by the time we get to Holiday 2016 or Spring 2017, is it too much to ask if I say I EXPECT Mass Effect: Andromeda to be not only 1080p but also 60fps?

 

What would be the excuse this time if it cannot be done?

[InterrogationBear]

What would be the excuse this time if it cannot be done?

Weak console hardware and most people prefer higher visual fidelity to 60fps gameplay.

[Xen]

no way this is gonna become a platform war....nope.

[NM_Che56]

Eh... I wouldn't say "unreasonable".  that's a little too strong.  I'd say, temper your expectations.  

 

PC? Yeah.  I think it's possible.  The Witcher 3 on PC runs at 1080/60.

 

Consoles? I'd expect 1080/30 on PS4 and 900 (upscaled to 1080)/30 on Xbox one.  That seems to be the "benchmark" for open world games on the consoles.  I'd also expect a more consistent and smoother frame rate on xbox one, but just by a little bit.

[NM_Che56]

I have both consoles.  FYI

 

NOT bragging.  Just trying to prove I'm not a fanboy

[Majestic Jazz]

Weak console hardware and most people prefer higher visual fidelity to 60fps gameplay.

 

1) The X1 is the weakest of the PC/X1/PS4 platforms and yet a game like Halo 5 will achieve 1080p/60fps

 

2) This isn't about 1080p vs 60fps but rather should ME:A have BOTH. I fully expect ME:A to be 1080p and possibly 4k for the PC, but where does that leave the fps? With the long development time, what would be the excuse if they STILL resort to 30fps for a current gen title that they had YEARS to work and have had games like DAI, BF4, Hardline, and Battlefront to learn from?

 

EDIT: I would also like to say that I will be building a PC just for ME:A as I know it would reach GREAT visual quality on the PC and the ability to play it at 4K. So this isn't a console gamer whining that his/her platform cant get what PC gamers get. But still, even though I will get it on PC, I STILL expect it to be at 60fps/1080p on the consoles as well. I just think there is no excuse for it not to be. 

[KR96]

The Witcher 3 was heavily downgraded for PC though. That was a hefty disappointment.

[CptFalconPunch]

Okay, if there is any good news about the holiday 2016/spring 2017 release window is the possibility that Bioware will have the extra time to give ME:A the best visual representation. All last generation a lot of developers kept saying that it was difficult to make a 1080p/60fps game on the technology of the PS3 and Xbox 360. It seems like developers are still sticking to that excuse now with the X1 and PS4 and I am not buying it. Many current gen games are pushing the boundaries such as Halo 5 which will be 1080p/60fps and so on. Also in terms of the Frostbite, Bioware had DAI to test things out, Star Wars Battlefront is providing extra "testing" and details. So by the time we get to Holiday 2016 or Spring 2017, is it too much to ask if I say I EXPECT Mass Effect: Andromeda to be not only 1080p but also 60fps?

 

What would be the excuse this time if it cannot be done?

 

I can think of a million reasons to tell you. The most crucial one being that cutting it down to 30 fps, means that you get more of everything in your game.

[Pork]

What would be the excuse this time if it cannot be done?

 

That consoles have outdated and poor hardware? 

[rashie]

I don't think that will happen without heavy graphical downgrades, its possible but I don't think that is the direction their going for.

[CptFalconPunch]

1) The X1 is the weakest of the PC/X1/PS4 platforms and yet a game like Halo 5 will achieve 1080p/60fps

 

2) This isn't about 1080p vs 60fps but rather should ME:A have BOTH. I fully expect ME:A to be 1080p and possibly 4k for the PC, but where does that leave the fps? With the long development time, what would be the excuse if they STILL resort to 30fps for a current gen title that they had YEARS to work and have had games like DAI, BF4, Hardline, and Battlefront to learn from?

 

EDIT: I would also like to say that I will be building a PC just for ME:A as I know it would reach GREAT visual quality on the PC and the ability to play it at 4K. So this isn't a console gamer whining that his/her platform cant get what PC gamers get. But still, even though I will get it on PC, I STILL expect it to be at 60fps/1080p on the consoles as well. I just think there is no excuse for it not to be. 

 

You can almost always reach 60 fps. For example, if you remove all the npc's, animation and downgrade the graphics to ps2 era, 60 is more than achievable.

 

Halo 5 is primarily a competitive/multiplayer shooter, where smooth movement of 60 fps matters more than the campaign experience.

[Andrew Lucas]

It's about software optimization, until late 2017, I don't doubt these consoles will make 1080p/60fps with most games, it's a learning curve, Bioware's enginners are handling the consoles for quite some time now, new technology will appear as well, Vulkan and DX12, both for optimization.

So yeah, it's very possible.

[Majestic Jazz]

You can almost always reach 60 fps. For example, if you remove all the npc's, animation and downgrade the graphics to ps2 era, 60 is more than achievable.

 

Halo 5 is primarily a competitive/multiplayer shooter, where smooth movement of 60 fps matters more than the campaign experience.

 

Halo 5 is a visually stunning game with great animations AND it is on the X1 which is the weakest hardware out now (not counting WiiU) and yet it still have 1080p/60fps. That is why I am not buying the argument that the current consoles can't handle it.

 

I can understand DAI not being 60fps on consoles or even Battlefront as these are earlier games, but by the time ME:A releases, developers would have had longer times working with the X1/PS4 and can understand the hardware better, especially WHEN ME:A slips into Spring 2017. 

[DanishViking]

it will be 30 on console since dragon age 3 was too.

 

Get it for pc if you want better grapichs and 60- 200 fps

[Andrew Lucas]

it will be 30 on console since dragon age 3 was too.
 
Get it for pc if you want better grapichs and 60- 200 fps

That barely makes sense lol

[Akrabra]

Isn't Battlefront running on 60 fps on consoles? If it is then it is very plausible that Mass Effect Andromeda will. More or less same engine and they have more experience with the engine and hardware now. 

[DanishViking]

Isn't Battlefront running on 60 fps on consoles? If it is then it is very plausible that Mass Effect Andromeda will. More or less same engine and they have more experience with the engine and hardware now. 

no because its coming from bioware

 

and dragon age 3 is 30 fps on console

 

so this will be to

 

so if you want high fps get it for pc.

[Dr. Rush]

1080p and 60 fps on a console? Unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. And frankly, I'd gladly trade FPS for AA and better draw distances.

[CptFalconPunch]

Halo 5 is a visually stunning game with great animations AND it is on the X1 which is the weakest hardware out now (not counting WiiU) and yet it still have 1080p/60fps. That is why I am not buying the argument that the current consoles can't handle it.

 

I can understand DAI not being 60fps on consoles or even Battlefront as these are earlier games, but by the time ME:A releases, developers would have had longer times working with the X1/PS4 and can understand the hardware better, especially WHEN ME:A slips into Spring 2017. 

 

Its a visually stunning corridor usually, ill go watch it.

 

Well you not buying anything doesn't mean much, because you are uneducated about how engines and games are made. Just comparing a FPS to a 3rd person shooter is uneven. The FOV differences are huge.

 

Working more with the systems and the engines increases efficiency, but if the devs want to focus on something else other than FPS they will. If they want to make it 60 fps they can. They choose not to.

[Akrabra]

no because its coming from bioware

 

and dragon age 3 is 30 fps on console

 

so this will be to

 

so if you want high fps get it for pc.

DA:I is 30 fps because it is on old platforms and it was earlier in development. I will play it on PC anyway. I am just saying that it isn't unlikely they could get it running on 60fps. There is still alot of work left to be done on the technical side, almost all of it. And if other companies out there can push 60 fps now. Bioware should be able to aswell.

[DanishViking]

DA:I is 30 fps because it is on old platforms and it was earlier in development. I will play it on PC anyway. I am just saying that it isn't unlikely they could get it running on 60fps. There is still alot of work left to be done on the technical side, almost all of it. And if other companies out there can push 60 fps now. Bioware should be able to aswell.

Its bioware we talk about they are bad at making console games ( they just dont run very good)

 

and i agree with you also like i said pc is the best place you can get it

 

if you want more fps and better grapichs.

[Guanxii]

If you want PC grade performance you're going to have to pay for it.

[SolNebula]

Yep it is probably

 

1080/60fps on PC

1080/30fps on PS4

900/30fps on XOne

[N7Mozza]

I think it's somewhat unrealistic. This isn't a halo game where 343 only has to worry about making halo on X1. The witcher as an example wouldn't be a real good comparison as was mentioned above it came out on the last gen consoles and ME:A will have come out 2 yrs after DA:I, but that's our best comparison unfortunately. I would expect 1080p at 30fps on consoles and whatever your PC can handle on PC. I just hope the PC version is not a console port and limited to 1920x1080p. It better have good graphic adjustments on PC too, not just high, medium or low.

[Riven326]

Halo 5 is a visually stunning game with great animations AND it is on the X1 which is the weakest hardware out now (not counting WiiU) and yet it still have 1080p/60fps. That is why I am not buying the argument that the current consoles can't handle it.

 

I can understand DAI not being 60fps on consoles or even Battlefront as these are earlier games, but by the time ME:A releases, developers would have had longer times working with the X1/PS4 and can understand the hardware better, especially WHEN ME:A slips into Spring 2017. 

The Xbox One and PS4 are mid-range machines in terms of hardware. It doesn't matter what you think they can handle, the vast majority of games on Xbox One are 900p or less. PS4 hits 1080p more often, but it still struggles to do so with the frame rate usually taking a hit. The Witcher 3 was downgraded because the consoles couldn't handle it and that was later confirmed by CDPR after the game had shipped.

 

The X1 and PS4 are easier to program for compared to previous generations, it's x86 architecture using non-specialized hardware. The priority for the manufacturers was to make the consoles cheap to make without selling at a loss. The only way they could do that was to include hardware that was already a few years old by that point. What you see is more or less what you're going to get from now on with these consoles. Five years from now developers will be no closer to achieving a solid 1080p 60fps than they are right now. The demand on the hardware is only going to get greater as time goes on.