Assassin's Creed IV "More Immersive" on PS4

[Mumorpuger]

The complaining in this thread is borderline pathetic, come on.

Something to be taken from this statement is that it looks like the PS4's hardware advantage is being pushed already, this doesn't bode well for the Xbone.

Maybe, but they said the same thing about the PS3/360.

 

[Ayay]

What he is saying is not so much news as it is an ad for selling this game all over again.They can hype this thing to the moon and back i am sure it will not be that diffrent and or worth the shiny new price they will take for it.

 

[hazydawn]

Because we all know that proper wind simulation is the secret to immersion, and not good writing.

It's obviously not as important as writing, but it is something that can be done better on more powerful systems. I feel this is exactly how multiplatform games should be handled, playing to the strengths of each system where possible while keeping the core game the same between them.

P.S. Thanks

And you think a PC couldn't possibly muster the strength to show these effects? Get real.
They'd cut out Anti-Alisasing just so you buy the PS4 version, f*cking bastards.

 

[Covarr]

Because we all know that proper wind simulation is the secret to immersion, and not good writing.

It's obviously not as important as writing, but it is something that can be done better on more powerful systems. I feel this is exactly how multiplatform games should be handled, playing to the strengths of each system where possible while keeping the core game the same between them.

P.S. Thanks

And you think a PC couldn't possibly muster the strength to show these effects? Get real.
They'd cut out Anti-Alisasing just so you buy the PS4 version, f*cking bastards.

Actually, I forgot about the PC entirely (embarrassingly, since I mainly play on PC, and the article even mentions the game is coming to PC). My point, though, was that it's not just the PS3/360 version at a higher resolution. Remember how many early 360 ports carried limitations from previous-gen versions with them? It would be really easy to do the same thing here.

P.S. Thanks

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Well...beinng a bit of a Sony fanboy, this seems like a bit or an arsepull. Not distinctly better graphics all-round, not better AI or something, they choose one of the vaguest and least consistent quantities in a game to say PS4 does better. What's next, characters more likable on Xbone? I'm all for there being little graphical improvements that make it better as a whole, but there comes a point where it doesn't matter if you've got a little bit of plant sway or a bit more.

 

[SushiJaguar]

How about a better game, Ubisoft? No? Just gonna rip off every Illuminati-esque fiction forever? Okay then.

 

[Strazdas]

This is getting really silly now, first Watchdogs say it'll be more 'immersive' on the Xbox One (admittedly because all the AI and physics is handled by the cloud

well, to be honest a better AI in a open world game does add a lot to imersion. if the people around react to you realisticly this helps drastically.

Yes but I really doubt there's going to be much of a difference. It's not like we're talking no AI vs AI. If Watchdogs has the space to say, have 3x more power devoted to city AI than GTAIV did, how do you manage to make the AI noticeably smarter than that? Especially with the Watchdog example where the AI is actually going to be open to experiencing lag. I imagine writing decent AI is much more of a programming problem than a power one, how do you manage to write code that explains what the AI should do in the thousands of different situations a sandbox game can throw up?

Making AI react based on its own current enviromental factors isntead of prescripted events will make it noticably smarter (or stupider if your program it wrong), and will take a LOT more power as every person has to spectate the world and analize it all the time, in fact so much power old consoels couldnt run openworld AI alone.
As for the lag, i dont buy that it will be cloud based at all, so can we jsut ignore that statement as marketing gimmic? also AI lag is sometimes programmed as "human reaction time lag" too.
it is a programming problem, however often you have to ignore it completely because current gen consoles cant run it anyway, and how dare you create a game for PCs nowadays. a good example is big world strategy games where AI react organically, and it takes the bloody long time processing the world to do it, but at least you cant say AI is suicidal like in GTA games where they jump in front of a car because they think your turning and are "TRying to get ouf of the way". by jumping in the middle of the road. because prescripted reaction.
You dont wrote a code to explain what it should do in thousands of situations. thats the point. The AI should be aware of what it can do and analize situation dinamically. in fact thats what AI should be to begin with, artificial intelligence, because what we currently call AI is just prescripted actors.

 

[BrotherRool]

As for the lag, i dont buy that it will be cloud based at all, so can we jsut ignore that statement as marketing gimmic? also AI lag is sometimes programmed as "human reaction time lag" too.

I'm perfectly willing to believe this whole cloud business is malarky, but if it is then the devs were just straight out lying, because I'm pretty sure the One doesn't come out on top in terms of hardware power when compared to the PS4 in anyway, certainly not noticeably enough to significantly improve the AI

it is a programming problem, however often you have to ignore it completely because current gen consoles cant run it anyway, and how dare you create a game for PCs nowadays. a good example is big world strategy games where AI react organically, and it takes the bloody long time processing the world to do it, but at least you cant say AI is suicidal like in GTA games where they jump in front of a car because they think your turning and are "TRying to get ouf of the way". by jumping in the middle of the road. because prescripted reaction.

I'd say the AI is often noticeably stupid and sucidal in big open world strategy games and it tends to show the same wonks that GTA AI did. Continually moving units back and forth along the same paths or creating an alliance and breaking it the turn after isn't much different then a pedestrian stuttering or jumping in front of a car. Also grand strategy games are waaay more discrete than a sandbox which makes the process of programming for them considerably easier because there aren't nearly as many variables to take into account. Any unit you use have a very set predetermined list of moves available to it and there's no chance of it being put in a situation where anything different applies. It would be like if you just had to program the walking and move from car AI and didn't have to consider what the pedestrian does if it's accidentally standing on top of a car, whilst someones firing their gun and triggering the panic mode but two sides of the car are edged by water. Strategy AI is like sandbox AI if you didn't have to care about any unusual situations, and the sandbox AI normally isn't too bad at dealing with that.

...but I will take your point that AI is hardware intensive. Now you've made me think about it, I'm pretty sure they had to split Vegas in half in New Vegas because of the number of NPCs and the difficulty running all that AI.

And also as far as the PC comment goes, to have any sizable PC market worth selling to you have to reduce the specs of the game considerably (and PCs are less efficient, my laptop is more powerful than my PS3, but my laptop struggles to run some 4 year old games on the lowest settings whereas my PS3 can play more modern games and have them look nicer). It's why EA can't fit their nice new game engine into the PC FIFA because like 40% of steam users still only have 2GB RAM, of which over 1GB is eaten up by their operating system alone.

 

[Strazdas]

As for the lag, i dont buy that it will be cloud based at all, so can we jsut ignore that statement as marketing gimmic? also AI lag is sometimes programmed as "human reaction time lag" too.

I'm perfectly willing to believe this whole cloud business is malarky, but if it is then the devs were just straight out lying, because I'm pretty sure the One doesn't come out on top in terms of hardware power when compared to the PS4 in anyway, certainly not noticeably enough to significantly improve the AI

Because developers have never done it before....
And Xbone comes out on top of Eggsbox 3.60 in terms of power which is really all they care about. PS3 was more powerful than Eggsbox, but still it didnt came on top that much. Not to mention that of power meant quality PC was the best all the time.
AI will be improved (if the programmers do their job well) over current gen titles.

I'd say the AI is often noticeably stupid and sucidal in big open world strategy games and it tends to show the same wonks that GTA AI did. Continually moving units back and forth along the same paths or creating an alliance and breaking it the turn after isn't much different then a pedestrian stuttering or jumping in front of a car.

it is true there are some silly AI sometimes, but there are awesome AI as well, and whne you see games that treat difficulity levels not as handicapping player but as making AI more smart its great fun to play them trying to outsmart the computer.

Also grand strategy games are waaay more discrete than a sandbox which makes the process of programming for them considerably easier because there aren't nearly as many variables to take into account. Any unit you use have a very set predetermined list of moves available to it and there's no chance of it being put in a situation where anything different applies. It would be like if you just had to program the walking and move from car AI and didn't have to consider what the pedestrian does if it's accidentally standing on top of a car, whilst someones firing their gun and triggering the panic mode but two sides of the car are edged by water. Strategy AI is like sandbox AI if you didn't have to care about any unusual situations, and the sandbox AI normally isn't too bad at dealing with that.

thats the point i was making, you dont. you have ot program walking and driving, and the rest has to be figured out by AI based on suroundings, and not a prescripted reaction to "Standing on a car in panic mode". this opens up AI to be either exctremely stupid or extremely smart, and here we have to believe in the programming overlords.
there are plenty of unusual sitautions for strategy AI. remmeber Rise of Nations in 2003? the AI there actually tried to trick you into moving your forces to defend your country only to attack with main force backstabbing you. It used distractions based on your troop movement and composition. heck, it is one of the most competetive AIs from that time period when you really let it shine on open maps (we used to go 3 vs 5 as in 3 humasn vs 5 AI and tried to survive the onslaught. even at Medium the AI provided a significant challenge). Sure there arent that many variables, but that kinda is the whole reason to have AI learn and analyze rather than reactionary, then you dont need to account for all those thousands of variables.

And also as far as the PC comment goes, to have any sizable PC market worth selling to you have to reduce the specs of the game considerably (and PCs are less efficient, my laptop is more powerful than my PS3, but my laptop struggles to run some 4 year old games on the lowest settings whereas my PS3 can play more modern games and have them look nicer).

PC specs even the old ones surpass the consoles significantly. the reason for having to reduce specs are simple really.
1. cluttered computer. PC does multiple things in the background. Console uses all its power for gaming. this seems to be obsolete in Xbone, so expect same shortcomming, though not as bad as people who have cluttered 100 toolbars in startup crap.
2. Laptops. laptop hardware specs are technically on par, in reality much weaker. i got a 10 year old desktop that runs almost as powerful as my 5 years old laptop. laptops are not made for power and of course they will struggle to run things that require maximum power. the whol laptop gaming fashion is noble but wasteful concept.
3. resolution. PCs run on much higher resolutions than consoles. Xbox default resolution is the bare minimum my PC can go to. and if i use that the games look awful. xbox actually upscales to higher resolution, meaning it doesnt really ever play at higher than SDTV resolutions. PCs on the other hand run games on 1600p and more nwoadys. you of course need more power to process higher resolutions. A LOT MORE.
as for looking nicer, i guess the beauty is in the eye of a beholder, for i found console titles to look awful compared to same titles on PC.
You can fix a lot of 1 yourself, you have to know beforehand for the 2, and as for 3 you can run console resolution and youll get same speed.

It's why EA can't fit their nice new game engine into the PC FIFA because like 40% of steam users still only have 2GB RAM, of which over 1GB is eaten up by their operating system alone.

It is indeed a shame OS eats over 1gb of ram on idle (though when challenged drops to 500mb on my win7 system and bellow 200mb on xp system), but with Xbone runing windows 8 this is yet another bonus removed from consoles.
recently CCP decided to stop supporting single-core processor units for their game, essentialy needing less backward compatibility to be coded into the engine. according to them 0.05% of userbase still used them (i have one machine runing on single core processor still). Not sure how true is 40% for 2 GB of ram. but 2 GB is still much more than 512MB. and they can always go crytecs route: cant run our game, well, time to upgrade? (though personally i like to push at least 5 years of life out of every PC i buy).

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Whoa, whoa, whoa...

Developers go to the effort to enhance the physics technology being presented, (at no extra cost to the consumer), to better utilise the strengths of the given platform.... and people are actually complaining here?

Correction: at no extra cost to one specific potential consumer GROUP.. PS4 owners.
Technically by the same logic, they are ripping OFF other consumers if they sell it for the same price without the same 'enhancements' or 'immersive experience.'

So If it the price is exactly the same for both systems us Xbox users should stage a boycott.
In fact, I think every gamer should start boycotting games like that, just to drive prices down.

 

[Adon Cabre]

Snip

Because PC users -- that is, those with high-to-ultra settings capacity -- love to relish in their superior graphical experience. It has never been about an even playing field for them. They've built an $800 rig, and they'll be damned if a $400 closed platform PC offers anything near their supremely aesthetic experience -- and they'll return to complaining about how the console is hurting this industry.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Late October isn't Q4? That's news. Also, that's great and all, we're getting wind physics for waves, but I'm probably still gonna get in on the PS3, since I don't immediately plan on grabbing a launch PS4, no matter how tempting it is.

 

[erbkaiser]

They really should have just made a spin off pirate game and not bothered having it be "assassins creed."

The game market needs more actual pirate games without having space aliens who impersonate roman gods, magical super artifacts from the bible, secret orders fighting each other because something something freedom, then there's some sort of apocalypse or something and Ubisoft didn't want to pay Kristen Bell so she dies randomly and wait people actually get paid to write this stuff?

What I'm saying is I really want CDPR to make a pirate game with a ship combat system like assassins creed 3. Because it would be great.

Agreed 100%. In my opinion AC3 sucked compared to AC2 because it was no longer set in a big city, with huge buildings to leap from etc. -- okay the trees were nice in the wilderness, but never did I really have the feeling of stalking someone or escaping a squad of guards like I did in AC2.
And the ship missions were excellent, but always felt like another game.

I will end up buying AC4 (in fact I already pre-ordered it for the PS4), but I would much rather see an Assassin's Creed set in the Golden Century of Amsterdam, or the London of the 18th Century or something, and a Ubisoft Pirate game along side it.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Uh-huh. Realistic wind effects.

If I hear people saying that they watched the sails bellow when they buy this game, I'll lose all faith in humanity. I remember hearing about some people staring at the walls in Bioshock Infinite, saying how the brick structures were all unique and realistic and stuff, and I was wondering why they weren't playing the damn game.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

And why won't it be included in the PC version?
Or will it be updated then?

Exactly. Or why wouldnt it be included on the Xbox one? Hmmm... perhaps I should change my preorder for AC4 to another game for the xbox one, since they want to make it a point to tell me they put more into the PS4 version, than everyone else's console/system.

Really brilliant move!

 

[Something Amyss]

Because we all know that proper wind simulation is the secret to immersion, and not good writing.

It's no dumber than what people usually call "immersion," such as first person perspective and POLYGONS IS EMOTION.