Ubisoft claims resolution isn't important for Far Cry 4 development.
Ubisoft claims resolution isn't important for Far Cry 4 development.
Hmmm no, that doesn't say much about the credibility of the material/source, this only demonstrates how quickly something gets spread to other websites. I mean, more websites claim Anita is the victim than sites (if there are any) that claim she is a fraud. Does that mean the more likely scenario is that she's a victim? Still calling hot air until some actual audio or video file pops up, or Ubisoft confirms. Call me a devil's advocate, but I really hate hypetrains as much as Ubisoft's bullshit.
This piece seems to focus more on gaming advancements than technical specs. While hardware improvements and visual quality are notable, the core issue is that 1080p at 60fps isn’t enough for my expectations. I’d avoid games that don’t meet this standard, though most do! The goal should be higher resolutions and smoother frames, especially with VR. The article’s point about resolution and frame rates being less important is worth noting.
I just do not understand your point guys Yes, we have 2 under powered consoles, that can still deliver fun for many people and yes, we have the overpowered PC-s that has many smart people who can modify programs Now, there is 1 (one) company out there, who makes decision based on their revenue. More game is sold to consoles, there is more money, so they go that way. it is simple. They see that the torrents are getting downloaded a lot and they sell a handful of copies compared to consoles, so they do not really push that market. Of course their PR team are trying to get it right, but for fox sake, we are talking about games, nothing that we should get angry about
We aren't upset about the consoles' limitations... We're frustrated when we're misled and misinformed about why games perform poorly. They claim we're too naive to expect better results from the new systems, dismissing resolution details and saying 30fps isn't enough. By 2014, a minimum of 1080p at 60fps should have been the standard for smooth gameplay!
Some developers prioritize console gaming over PC, yet they maintain respect for PC players, avoid nonsense, don't create confusion, and don't mislead. Ubisoft is an example of this. Most people seem to react with surprise rather than anger.
Still, we're discussing a company that produces two versions of Assassins Creed 9 (or so sarcastically) and Far Cry 4, not that far from Assassins Creed 1, but moving on to Far Cry 2. I'm absolutely certain PC gamers will play these titles at high resolution and 144 FPS, since we can tweak the games. And while the PRs acting standoffish are understandable, in the end you just pirate the game, mess it up, and enjoy yourself.
I believe at some point, creators will decide they no longer want to be involved in this game. I can't tolerate developers being limited by these machines that restrict their creative freedom. If this leads to a shift toward more computer-focused gaming, I'm in favor of letting them fade away. Of course, some fools might say they don't mind a 30fps if their investment didn't work, but eventually creators will make choices that benefit them. @HippY, you seem confused. Ubisoft doesn't offer moddable or open-source titles. If a game is built for 30fps, it will struggle with anything higher. This isn't just one company's issue—it's a tactic to make people accept declining performance so they can release more visually average games. Powered by toasters, really. It's not just about profitability; Steam actually drives much more revenue for developers than standard sales. In truth, I think they'll have a brief success before it fades away. Games like Star Citizen might just be early signs of what most creators will adopt eventually.