56 réponses à ce sujet

[midnight tea]

It doesn't work like cross-gen title. Actually I think you didn't read very clearly either, I did say that they made new gen game then realised they had to tone down stuff in order it to somehow work on old gen and this what they have done. 

 

And my excerpt from that interview proves that it wasn't that simple - even if the prototype has been designed for, say, powerful PC, eventually they had to approach everything with old-gens in mind. 

 

 

 

Like for example they first did tactical cam then realised it drains too much memory (or that some other stuff drains too much memory) and decided to tone it down on old gen by adding annoying fading blacks to reserve memory (confimed on twitter by dev). So instead of thinking of making cross-gen tactical cam they made new gen and then were suprised it didn't work on old gen and cut it down in annoying way instead of making it right since the start. That has been story of the whole port of DAI on old gen

 

They did "make it right" - they've made old-gen consoles capable of running the thing in the first place. Just like lowering the texture quality allowed consoles to load the entire map.... or are you trying to suggest that they should just stick solely to old-gen technology in the first place? ...Despite the fact that in the future modules and technologies developed for old-gen consoles soon will be obsolete (and I've read in more than one article that one of reasons why devs drop old-gen consoles is because there are significant differences between designing for old- and new-gen)?

 

No point downgrading new technology or focusing on old one, when only the former stays relevant in the long run. Which is why compromises had to be made in many areas for the game, no matter of the port, to both run on old-gen as well as present itself well on next-gen and PC  - not all of them worked, but they've made a gamble. Some of it did pay of and some of it didn't. It happens.

 

But we're getting way too far away from original point.

[Panda]

And my excerpt from that interview proves that it wasn't that simple - even if the prototype has been designed for, say, powerful PC, eventually they had to approach everything with old-gens in mind. 

 

 

 

They did "make it right" - they've made old-gen consoles capable of running the thing in the first place. Just like lowering the texture quality allowed consoles to load the entire map.... or are you trying to suggest that they should just stick solely to old-gen technology in the first place? ...Despite the fact that in the future modules and technologies developed for old-gen consoles soon will be obsolete (and I've read in more than one article that one of reasons why devs drop old-gen consoles is because there are significant differences between designing for old- and new-gen)?

 

No point downgrading new technology or focusing on old one, when only the former stays relevant in the long run. Which is why compromises had to be made in many areas for the game, no matter of the port, to both run on old-gen as well as present itself well on next-gen and PC  - not all of them worked, but they've made a gamble. Some of it did pay of and some of it didn't. It happens.

 

But we're getting way too far away from original point.

 

I do think that old gen was afterthought in the development that created lot of problems for both gens. Your plans need to be realistical from the start after all, limitations need to be addressed in early development stages not late. It really seems like Bioware was way over their heads and had to cut things, because of it.

 

For this game both technologies are relevant cause the game will always be cross-gen. Next game won't be and there old gen and it's technology isn't relevant.

[midnight tea]

I do think that old gen was afterthought in the development that created lot of problems for both gens. Your plans need to be realistical from the start after all, limitations need to be addressed in early development stages not late. It really seems like Bioware was way over their heads and had to cut things, because of it.

 

For this game both technologies are relevant cause the game will always be cross-gen. Next game won't be and there old gen and it's technology isn't relevant.

 

The game has been in development long before new consoles were released, with a working prototype presented to the public BEFORE Playstation 4 even hit the stores. Makes it rather hard to believe that development on old-gens was merely an afterthought.

[Panda]

The game has been in development long before new consoles were released, with a working prototype presented to the public BEFORE Playstation 4 even hit the stores. Makes it rather hard to believe that development on old-gens was merely an afterthought.

 

Hmm I have wondered about this as well and haven't yet figured out why they did such new-gen game without considering limitations of old gen. I mean as you said they eventually did by cutting down things, but shouldn't those things been known from the beginning ^^;

[Orvar83]

 

Well NO - the game hasn't been developed with current gen and PC in mind: it was developed with 5 platforms in mind, BUT in order for them to work on 5 platforms AND the game remain the same (gameplay-wise at least, even if not graphic-wise) many elements from the game had to be cut or heavily limited or modified in order for old gen platforms to be able to run it.

 

 

Dude! come on the game DOES NOT "WORK" on 5 platforms, it works on 3, unless you consider a game that crashes, has sound dissapearing issues, stutters, freezed characters while IN combat, shader pop ins WHILE IN cutscenes, a game that "WORKS" I'd like to wonder how you would feel if the game "WORKED" like that on your platform, i wonder how many posts you'd be making on the subject, also The Witcher 3 wasn't released on old gen, besides, I never even compared it to that game, I haven't even played it yet, i just commented on how much i loved the books, as for the whole AC4 GTA V RDR Skyrim thing, WE old gen gamers are comparing it to that, cause that's the reference we have for good open world games.

Look ultimately, just so you understand where we're coming from, instead of dissmising it, WE DON'T GIVE A RAT'S *SS ABOUT WHY, OR NOT THE GAME DOESN'T RUN WELL ON OUR PLATFORM, WE PAID FOR A GAME THAT WORKS, WE-DID-NOT-GET-IT. It's just that simple, just like the dude from the original post did not get his money's worth out of this sh*tty looking DLC. When I pay for a game I hold it to the same standard of quality to that of any other game i've played on the same platform, which ever platform that may be, if it doesn't hold up I get p*ssed off just like you would if you where in the same situation, just like pc gamers got p*ssed off at WB/Rocksteady recently, just like curent gen platforms got p*ssed off at Ubisoft when AC Unity came out, we are paying customers, "paying" being the functioning part of that frase, we DON'T give a sh*t to why it doesn't work, WE JUST WANT IT TO WORK, and it's the developers job to make it work, and the publishers job to guarantee it does, so Bioware/ EA FAILED.

[PlasmaCheese]

Oh my gossshh. Gross. Those pictures look so bad. :c Arms looking broken...Jeez, the Arishok armor doesn't even look good on IB. His body looks a totally different color and it looks way too smooth compared to his weathered face. All his scars are gone!

Not even going to talk about Solas.

[Orvar83]

Just as a reference this is how some cutscenes look on old gen, not all for sure, but some, in this one this looked like this for easily 1/5 of the cutscene basically Roderick loaded completely olny after sitting down, maybe he was tired.