Ben-DutkaThis is not an accusation; it's merely a question based on recent observations.
In a new interview with VentureBeat , Bungie senior environment artist Jason Sussman explained why Destiny isn't trying to hit 60 frames per second:
"It’s a lot of different things. I could get really technical, but I’d bore you to death. A lot has to do with performance. We’re cross-platform, so we had to be very delicate with all four consoles, making sure they have the same experience, that it looks as good as it possibly can on all these consoles. A lot goes into that, from geometry to textures to post effects to particles to how many players you get on the screen. We’re always balancing that out to make sure everyone gets the same experience."
Thanks to the recent Xbox One update, Bungie can get the resolution of the game up to 1080p on Microsoft's system; it was already going to be 1080p on the PlayStation 4. So, the question now is: As the team takes this "all versions have to be the same" approach to the project, does this mean they're not striving for 60FPS on the PS4 simply because the Xbox One can't handle it?
It's a legitimate question. Thus far in 2014, we've seen dozens of headlines about multiplatform games performing better on the PS4. There are numerous titles that were confirmed to either have a better resolution or frame rate (or both) on the PS4; the most recent example would be Ubisoft's Watch Dogs (900p on PS4, 792p on Xbox One). So, could we assume that Bungie might've been able to get a better FPS with the PS4 version of Destiny , but they're not for the sake of…cross-platform harmony?
Of course, it might have nothing to do with that. Maybe neither system could manage better than 30FPS due to how Bungie is designing Destiny . Still, it's worth asking.
Related Game(s): Destiny
You're forgetting that Destiny is also out for Ps360.
And also, this is a good video to watch regarding console parity by boogie2988.
Watch Dogs Hidden Graphics and Console Parity: http://youtu.be/NY13MHHd988
No
That's too long and confusing of a response. Do you think maybe you could summarize it?
LOL!
Short and sweet sometimes is the best method. My PSN friend 🙂
Im getting the impression that the increasing the resolution is easier than increasing fps. So most power from ps4 are used at higher resolution instead. Destiny will probably be the same.
After playing Destiny Alpha, I am more then content with the 1080p and 30 fps.
To be honest, I have no problem with ANY game following this example of resolution and frame rate.
As far as the Xbox impact goes, I wouldn't surprised.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 6/18/2014 3:15:43 PM
Very incorrect headline. This game is coming out across all platforms, including PS3 and 360. I can safely say 30 FPS locked is much better for this game than 60FPS unlocked.
60fps is the best when it comes to FPS titles.
It's most likely because developers refuse to let the PS3 and 360 go away. I'll give Bungie a pass on this, but when Destiny 2 comes out and is PS4, X1 with PS3 and 360 a distant memory, it better hit 1080p, 60 fps. This day and age anything less is unacceptable on these supposed high powered machines.
Last edited by Gamer46 on 6/18/2014 7:34:12 PM
I don't see ps3/360 being a reason to dumb down the fps. You can reduce draw distance to significantly bump up fps and adjust detail accordingly for the push. The last Gen can handle 30fps and lower ddetail and draw distance. No different than a low level PC system handling tricky game engines (cryengine; choose whichever).
I do think mircosoft's x1 has more to do with it than any other reason. That said, I don't think the ps4 can run it without noticing tearing/fps ddrop at 60.
So… I'd have to say that it would boil down to neither machines handling the game engine optimization without sacrificing too much of what seemingly every developer is aiming to achieve; texture detailand draw distance.
The game felt like 30fps to me.
I'd imagine, as with anything, there was a trade-off in determining lowering image quality and boosting frame rate or vice-versa. After extensive testing I'm sure they resolved that the way they have it now was the best choice for the experience.
Even if the XO meets 1080p res it's likely struggling somewhere else to meet the PS4 standard. Even without the Kinect, the XO's hardware is simply not as beefy as the PS4. This could manifest itself in, say, less foliage, or less shader precision, or level-of-detail scaling that isn't as good as the PS4's. Something's gotta give somewhere on the XO. That much seems certain to me.
I like the gloss of 60fps, but eventually, after 10 minutes or so, you stop noticing. Mind you, 30fps feels a little dated now, too. Personally, I'm happy so long as it's over 30fps. My computer isn't as pimped as it could be, or anything, but I've been getting 50-55fps on FFXIV, and I certainly appreciate it.
Some games should just be next gen….diminishing this title for the sake of the PS3 or xbox 360 doesn't do it proper justice. After playing the Alpha, I wasn't exactly blown away…I think in part because it feels it feels less like a AAA next gen and more of a AAA Ps3 game.
At least it's a legit AAA game right?
So I made an account for this website just to tell you (Ben Dutka), that you are an idiot… and should be using your time to do some thing else than write blogs because you sir, are terrible at it. You've contradicted yourself completely. Maybe perhaps you should try gardening instead?
One more thing….You also have no need to justify your purchase and love of your ps4 because quite frankly nobody really cares bro. People come to this site for media. Not to read your useless thoughts. Just saying…