We’ve already said that The Division – based on its closed beta build – has been slightly downgraded from its E3 tech demos. And according to an Ubisoft developer, the PC version – while looking better than the console versions – does not push the graphical envelope so that it can stay close to the console version.
As the developer revealed in an interview with Team Epiphany:
“One good thing about The Division is we’ve always considered the PC as a separate platform. We do have to keep it in check with the consoles; it would be kind of unfair to push it so far away from them. But it’s been good having a dedicated PC build for this game.”
The developer concluded that he’s ‘really happy that we’re pushing the PC build as much as we are; there’s a lot more customized options than the console.’
This falls in line with everything we’ve witnessed so far. While the PC version of The Division demands high-end hardware in order to be enjoyed, it does not come close to the E3 demos because Ubisoft did not want to push that particular version so far away from the console version.
This basically explains why a number of the game’s effects have been toned down, as we’ve already pointed out in our previous The Division article.
Kudos to our reader ‘Psycho_Warhead’ for bringing this to our attention!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
Isn’t this the first time a Developer’s actually directly admitted to being forced to cripple the PC version in order to keep it in line with the Console version?
Or, at least the first time in several years? I mean, so far we’ve basically been treating it as a fact because it’s always presented itself as the only logical conclusion, but nobody ever actually admitted it, technically we’ve just been making assumptions the entire time.
Wow. Standing ovation, man. Seriously. Nice catch, btw.
Agreed. Honesty goes a long way. What many gamers hate is when we KNOW we’re being lied to, devs know we know they’re lying to us, but they continue to lie anyways. Just be honest and at least that’s the beginning of some kind of dialogue.
The insipid, phony PR double-talk and verbal gymnastics is what I hate, personally.
TW3 devs also admitted to that fault…
CDPR’s top brass semi-addressed the issue;
“Did the console versions restrict the PC version?
“If the consoles are not involved there is no Witcher 3 as it is,” answers Marcin Iwinski, definitively. “We can lay it out that simply. We just cannot afford it, because consoles allow us to go higher in terms of the possible or achievable sales; have a higher budget for the game, and invest it all into developing this huge, gigantic world.
“Developing only for the PC: yes, probably we could get more [in terms of graphics] as there would be nothing else – they would be so focused, like if we would develop only on Xbox One or PlayStation 4. But then we cannot afford such a game.”
Afterwards though they hid behind the “technical reasons” excuse to justify the Lighting System downgrade, claiming the change would have happened anyway regardless of what System/s they were primarily focusing on, because it didn’t work in the Open-World Environment, compared to the “closed off” Tech Demo they originally displayed it in.
The Ubisoft guy instead addressed it directly. Don’t get wrong, it’s worth noting, but there’s a distinct difference in their approaches to this. One is guarded, trying to justify & excuse the choices they made, the other is open, explaining exactly why they did what they did.
while i agree with what your saying, CDPR is a much smaller company then UBIsoft. so i still have to give a little understanding to them.
Yes man but honesty shouldn’t have to do anything with being a small or a big company! Although to tell you the truth I expect more honesty from a smaller company.
Nope canandian/frenchman, thats a deal breaker.
It’s sad but understandable: they’ll probably sell more copies on console than on PC, but a PC version pushed to the max would be something gamers would talk about for years in a manner people did about Crysis for years before and after it came out.
Downgrading games so that the slow kid(consoles) stay in the race is just something devs have to do to make a buck. I don’t blame them but I wonder how incredible a lot of these games would be if they weren’t hamstrung by being dependent on console hardware.
My hope is that Steam machines/console PCs explode in popularity, especially with PC-based VR right around the corner(VR is demanding), and this will bolster the numbers of high-end hardware owners to the tune of hopefully tens of millions more than exist now. Those new high-end gamers will demand higher standards from regular monitor games and will have the money to motivate devs to pay even more attention to the PC platform.
Despite this being a sad truth and all. We PC gamers actually have a few Ace up the sleeve:
1. We can increase engine settings via config files in many games.
2. We often also have the luxury of mod support, where people are managing to increase the visuals even further.
3. We have our beloved Reshade, to additionally enhance the visuals.
Although these three are great and all, it can’t really hold a candle to native higher settings hardcoded into the engine for their specific games.
There’s some hope for Division though, as the Beta included a meaty config file with loads of lines to adjust. That opens up for people to maybe unlock those held back settings.
Yea and 144hz/144fps, 1440p/4k, mouse and keyboard 🙂
+ OLED!!! 0.1 ms delay yummm 🙂 4K yumm! 120/140hz doubleyummy! Petty console peasants can keep sitting and staring at their high response time 1080p TV’s.
Heck, a great monitor is half the thing when it comes to display graphics!
Most of us still use 1080p monitrs. I have 21,5” 1080P IPS and it is a great monitor combined with a powerful pc(gtx 970 g1 gaming 2500k 12 gb ram)
LOL i am still using a 900p monitor combined with 3GB 280x,, 10GB RAM.
Haha a 900p monitor in 2016? Such thing does not exist anymore.I had a 1024p(1280×1024) monitor until summer 2014 when it burned. Then i got a 1920×1080 monitor and WOW graphics in all games became so much better. You need to buy a new monitor to enjoy your pc to to the max. Having such a pc on a crap monitor like this is making games movies , e.t.c look terrible. Why are you still keeping it? The cheapest 1080p monitors the 21,5′ ones like mine costs 140 euros nowdays so go and buy one of them if you dont want to spent more money for a 23”+ or if you dont have enough space on your desk to fit a bigger monitor. And i had a 560 ti when i bought that monitor and even with that card i saw huge difference in graphics compared to the 1280×1024. When at November 2014 i got GTX 970 the difference and imrpovement only became more huge.
Its not about money….i am planning for a good 1080p monitor now ……. been using this monitor for 4 years.still its as good as new..i want my monitor to show some issues so i can say your time has come my friend your dying….LOL .and yeah i have seen the difference betwn 900p and 1080p its easily noticeable…
I’m with you on what you said but i wouldn’t call console players “peasants”. It’s mostly their money that funds pc games in general, sadly ;(
Yeah because they don’t know better, getting a console may be cheaper than a high end PC, but games for PC is significantly cheaper, especially with sites like Kinguin, G2A, GOG, GMG etc. So in the long run, they will spend as much or more money than the PC gamer.
I’m sorry but I’m gonna keep calling them peasants, because they literally support companies that ruin the gaming industry and holds back technical progress.
That technical progress part indeed. And yea sites like you named offer crazy discounts on games, no doubt they sell games like hot cakes. 😀
because of cheaters this game will locked from changing game files 🙂
No, it’s the games config file, such files doesn’t get locked. There’s no way you can cheat using the config file.
Do you know what user .cfg files are?
i dont get it. even if they sell 90% more on consoles than PC, what do they lose by having their PC version looking much better?
the only scenario i can think of is the console users getting mad at this and so boycotting the game? but it wouldnt make much sense and seems a bit far fetched..
Console Gamers have in the past whined quite loudly when the PC version of something has looked “too much better” than the version they get (granted, this was at the end of the PS3/X360 Generation, but yeah).
Not to mention that Sony & Microsoft also quite likely whine in the background, hence creating pressure on Publishers/Developers to make sure the Graphical jump isn’t TOO big between the Platforms, lest they’re willing to risk getting a bad deal on Console Royalties, or whatever else they still hold over them.
Besides all that, making boundary-pushing Graphics would cost a lot more than just making Console-level Textures, & then uncompressing them for PC, calling it a “High-Resolution Texture Pack.” Dragon’s Dogma PC for example didn’t get Re-Textured, they just uncompressed the original Textures that the Team had designed all those years ago, but the PS3 couldn’t handle.
yea i get the price thing. but since they turned off stuff they already had apparently (from the trailers) i thought it wasnt a factor here. but yea i dont see them making extra stuff just for the pc verison
sony and microsoft making some pressure seems sadly something that could happen but i dont know
hopefully we arent in this same situation 5 years from now
I wouldn’t think of it as “turning off,” I don’t think this is the same situation as with Watch_Dogs, wherein they sloppily removed the Settings to certain Graphical features in order to downgrade the visual experience without actually going through & deleting the coding to those features, hence resulting in our ability to find those “hidden” settings & use them;
I think this is more like, the 2013 version was done as a Vertical Slice, a Tech Demo, almost, to showcase the SnowDrop Engine’s capabilities without doing something like Epic Games’ Samaritan or Infiltrator Demo’s, whereas the 2016 version is completely separate, a separate Save File in a separate Folder, done completely separately from the Demo we first saw years back.
As for the subsequent Trailers, touching those up is standard practice. Unless it clearly states “In-Engine/In-Game Footage”, it’s touched up, & even then, it’s probably been touched up.
lets pray this things from E3 demo was not cutted from final build
It’s just the time and effort it would take to make a much superior version of a game that perhaps only a few hundred thousand gamers would really get to experience, since high-end gaming PC owners are probably in the 10-15 million range globally.
This is why I’m hoping that consumer virtual reality that’s releasing in a few months will motivate millions to either upgrade to recommended specs for VR(a GTX 970 as a minimum) or get a Steam machine of equal power and that will indirectly expand the market for high-end monitor gaming by a large margin.
People who can game at 90fps in VR at 1200/1440p will be able to game at 1440p/120fps or 4K/60fps on a single monitor. GPUs should actually get cheaper with this influx of new consumers buying in which will make it more economically feasible for MORE people to get into high-end PC gaming, giving devs the necessary financial incentive to make truly native PC versions of games that take advantage of the hardware. The snowball effect.
It’s also this artificial “platform parity” nonsense where devs and publishers don’t want to burn bridges with console manufacturers by producing PC versions of multi-plats that make the console versions look terrible, which could easily happen.
yea i get the superior costs and i agree with that. however some effects apparently already existed within the game so its just odd to remove them like they did in watch dogs for instance
I think the takeaway here, though, is that it’s never been a better time to be a PC gamer and it’s only going to get better. The future of optimization with things like Vulkan, marketplace platforms like Steam that offer convenience and cheap games and massive growth year over year means that we can look forward to further developments in the PC gaming sphere.
Yes, sometimes the highest end gamers have to fiddle a little with things like INI files since devs/publishers don’t feel the need to incorporate certain features out of the box, but it’s still easier than it’s ever been to be a PC gamer. I started out in the early 90s when just getting a game to work, period, was a miracle. Now, it’s a wholly different experience. The ease of use is just there now.
Because it’s not fair to SONY and MICROSOFT get it?
It must be Ubisoft pressing these demands to Massive. God*amn consoles and god*amn greedy Ubisoft. This developer just confirmed what most developers do today but refuses to admit it. Sad truth is sad 🙁
Side note: I listened a bit further on that interview, and one thing that caught my attention was a feature that allows console players to actually lower the graphics settings in favour to performance. If I understand this correctly this means people can lower settings to achieve 60 fps on the console versions instead of the 30 fps the games comes with as default. If so, that’s an awesome feature. Never seen any other developer do that. Interesting.
Wow, the idiots actually finally did something both sides of the board (PC & Console Gamers both) have been calling for for how many years now? Damn. I’m double-impressed now.
yea buy why put a slider on console?slide the graphics up in pve and slide them down for pvp?
Sure, why not. PvP Textures are already half a step down compared to PvE Textures in games running at 30 FPS/900p anyway.
makes sense
Indeed, good stuff for console owners.
Well it’s most likely gonna be a setting that affects graphics significantly, since going from 30 to 60 fps is literally doubling the performance. A console can’t do miracles with their little graphics unit equal to a 6 years old midrange class GPU 🙁
In Final Fantasy XIV (the console version) you can change the graphics for better performance
i mentioned that to 😀 console players if their FPS is slover they cant turn onf some graphical settings 😀
Maybe you should try again, when you know how to speak English 😀
i told you i am georogian learn georgian if you want it and then talk with me 🙂
to bad it will be dead in 6 months.on pc.x10 more popular games like cod doesnt even last more then 6 months on pc.mindless 4 player gank groups is all you are going to see in the dark zone.thats all they did in the beta just hang around for some one to go rogue and run em down.you mite see a solo guy take out 2 people but other wise hats all the dark zone pvp was in the beta.
mindless gank pvp doesnt last long.this game was meant to be a pve game with pvp to compete with destiny or destiny 2 when it comes out.thats why the pve zones are 3-4 times larger then the dark zone.its still a fun game and i may want to gank people my self.
Well let’s just hope the devs took lessons from the Beta and change a few things to the better. We don’t know how much content DZ is gonna have in retail, how big it’s gonna be and what changes devs are gonna do to give DZ more gameplay value and balance. One thing is clear though, they had the Closed Alpha and Beta for a good reason.
you saw the beta right people at high lvl were in 4 player groups just playing passive and wating for someon to go rogue.the smaller groups or solo players were just trying to shoot around people to bait them to go rogue.
it was kind of mindless.
Hello handsome.
Sad person is sad. Dont make me post again that picture when you trash talk console. Leave this site
you made me do it.
LOL! That’s how I look when maintaining computers or replacing hardware 😀 #underwearonlyftw
Still better then being seen gaming at 900P on a “next gen” console
Pc+Wii U always better than these console “””””NEXT GEN”””””
and how is that a problem only PC users face?
gank groups are universal in all pvp type games, pc or console.
i never said just pc and yes it will happen on consoles to.all you will see is gank groups think about it.they will drive solo to 2 person groups not to dark zone any pvp any more.24 man gank froups in a mmo like eso is killing the pvp there.its already dead.all people do is 24 man zerg groups.that get old and boring.
No matter how a twist and turn things I can’t really seem to find how
the graphics could be even better in Division, everything just looks so
great.
No higher texture resolutions is needed. No higher particle
amounts are needed. No better shadows than PCSS is needed. HBAO+ is
sufficient. Draw distance and shadow distance can most likely be
increased in the config file. Lighting is top notch, don’t see how it
could improve. Tessellation and stuff? I think all character/objects are
highpoly enough. Parallax mapping for walls, surfaces, roads etc is
sufficient. Time of day cycle, dynamic weather, weather effects, fog,
mist, everything looks great. There is a supersample option, so better
AA isn’t needed either. Depth of field already uses Bokeh shader.
Procedural destruction is some of the best i’ve ever seen, don’t see how
it could improve much. Bottom line, I don’t see how the graphics could
really be much better in Division.
I would instead like the devs
to increase the content, quality of content, size of the gameword, gameplay mechanics, AI, story, animations, netcode, multiplayer, voice acting, sound design, music, interface, GUI, HUD, what not. These could always be done better and increased. Not the graphics
:S
Why people always think only about graphics, if a game engine is castrated, not only graphics quality gets downgraded, everything does, and that’s what should piss us off mostly, not graphics itself.
Console in a nutshell
PS4/XBoxOne Settings – if even. Often it’s still just “Consoles, Low, Medium, High, Very High” with some of the lazier teams.
P.S. I miss Ultra Settings 🙁
Xbone and PS4 has about the same hardware so yeah makes sense to only call it “consoles” I guess Wii doesn’t count xD
PC will be held back, that’s true, but in all fairness, at the end of the life of the previous console gen, visuals on PC were miles away. Just compare Crysis 3 and TLoU. Same thing will be with this gen.
It’s just that the gap between a middle end PC and a console it not that big yet, as it was 4 years ago.
Crysis 3/Battlefield 3 were 2 out of “100” Games though, & to be fair, they were both pretty mediocre/empty, leaning on their graphical shine & established fanbases to sell themselves more than not; BF3 was a mediocre Console-focused Multiplayer Game with a terrible Campaign & a good PC Port, whereas Crysis 3 was a decent Stealth-Shooter with damn-good shiny PC Graphics, a short, dumb linear Campaign & really, really dead Multiplayer. Neither deserved the IP names attached to them, & neither were (are) worth $30, nevermind the launch price of $60.
Ironically, quite unlike The Last of Us…… Not to mention that Naughty Dog only released TLoU on PS3 since they knew the PS4 was coming, it was all about milking it for all they could before they did the “proper” release on the PS4, same story as Rockstar & GTA V.
I choose Crysis 3 and TLoU because they have a somewhat similar art style, but it’s not 2, really. Most of the big AAA hits were like that: Tomb Raider, Metro, both Batmans, Sleeping Dogs, Far Cry 3, Max Payne 3, etc.
Hah, walked into that one. Focused too much on the Titles you specifically mentioned, my bad, yeah. Human Revolution fits on your list too, btw. Though there were just as many Games (if not more) at the same time that were horrible straight-up Console Ports, too. Dark Souls for example, was a horrible, lazy joke authorized by a Publisher who thought it wouldn’t move 100,000 copies, lifetime.
You’re right though, while New-Gen Consoles didn’t equalize the field with PCs, they did close the gap significantly when compared to the PS3/X360, & DX12 has bought them some further breathing room too, though there’s still quite a sizeable gap regardless, & it’ll just keep getting bigger, unfortunately.
HR wasn’t really a technically impressive game. The art direction is sure great, and it sure looked much better than the console version, but so as many other games. Pre-rendered cutscenes and some truly bad character models are major downside points.
I can’t really remember any other bad ports other than Dark Souls back then. It was one of the first footsteps of eastern developers on Steam.
AC3? One of the AC’s, at least. There’s been so many they kind-of blur together, but I remember one in particular was like, Just Cause 3 levels of broken, wasn’t it?
I don’t play Ubi games since Conviction, but I heard people complaining about 3 and 4. Although I don’t think it’s Dark Souls level of disaster. Honestly, no one expected anything from DS from a technical standpoint, so I would give an excuse for this port. DS II however… looks like a PS2 game, weird and broken controls, and now they sell a graphical upgrade (that doesn’t really change anything). Shameful display.
Crysis 3 was awesome. Definitely worthy of the name.
It is just a matter of time before someone working for one of these developers, CD Project Red, Ubisoft, EA, leaks a console publishing contract from Microsoft or Sony. I absolutely guarantee there is a console parity clause in those contracts, and that is the reason these developers feel so compelled to downgrade the work they have already done on the PC versions of these games.
Watch Dogs, Witcher 3, and now the Division all downgraded. The downgrade is obviously the combining factor here, but we know there is a downgrade because we already saw versions of the game running with more advanced graphics prior to release. This means they already did the work to make the game better looking and able to run the more intense graphical features. They have to do more work to downgrade the PC version then just leave the original effects in place. There has to be a compelling force behind undoing that kind of work, and the most obvious conclusion is that MS and Sony are requiring the developers to do it to keep their consoles competitive with PC.
Oh yeah, I forgot to add something 😀
About that Ultra settings:
youtube. com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc
😀 😀 😀 😀 😀
Because psychologically 11 “should” make a difference/is even better than an “amped up 10,” as we’re hard-coded to think “1-10.”
😀
LOL priceless picture dude. I remember seeing that for the first time in Crysis SDK/Editor and I was like lolwtf? I also saw in in the UDK…
I thought it was an edited image, but then I looked it up and it’s real. Pure gold!
Shame, though, that Crytek now is making Robinson: The Journey as a PS4 exclusive.
they are not graphical masterpieces, but Half-life 2 to me still looks good for a 2005 game and i am sure i can say the same for Portal in 2017. i doubt i can do the same for many titles though.
also there is a good chance Robinson will come to PC later like Ryse. Crysis is making a PC VR game anyway but either way does it even matter? i highly doubt first batches of VR games are gonna be anything to brag about.
Yeah, HL2 was made at the time when Valve’s games were on the cutting edge of technology. I wasn’t speaking of those times but rather of presence. Now Valve’s productions aren’t really pretty.
There should be Cevat Yerli in this picture, instead of Gabe Newell.
but hasnt it been years since valve actually made a game tho lol
It even improves my argument, GabeN is just irrelevant as a “spokesman” of PC games’ graphics.
I agree, i still think HL 2 looks nice. Most games these day try and make themselves look nice in trailers. Then you play them and they are a blurry mess.
When have you played HL2 last? It looks horrible now.
So Ubisoft actually admitted it the consoles are holding PC back because it’s “unfair” to the consoles. LOL
“As you know, Massive has its roots in PC development. We are working hard and we want to make sure that we have a very high quality experience on PC. You can be sure that our PC version won’t be a port, but a full-fledged, optimized version! We want to create the best game possible regardless of what platform you play on”
It’s been like that for years now, and pretty much everyone did/do so
The game is already using my 980 Ti & i7 to the max. If they pushed it any further then we would be complaining that the game is an unoptimized POS. Has anyone ever considered maybe the real reason they did not push it any further is because most PC gamers will not be able to run it well at release it the developers pushed the visuals any further.
Arguably tech-savvy people would be smart enough to point out the difference to others who aren’t as tech-savvy, as with Crysis; Crysis itself is actually really badly optimized, it’s not until Warhead that they really cleaned up the Engine, which is why most Benchmarks still using Crysis use Warhead, rather than Crysis proper.
Very good points you’re taking up here. I think Crytek was under pressure when releasing Crysis as I think they had agreements and deadlines with both nVidia, Microsoft and Intel. The first DX10 cards came out just before Crysis, nvidia’s top line card 8800 Ultra released just 6 month prior to Crysis release. And Intel had just released its Core 2 Duo Extreme CPUs. Crysis was even advertised to run best with Core 2 Duo Extreme. They also locked the Very High settings to DX10 only, which meant you needed both nVidias new DX10 capable graphics cards AND Windows Vista to use it. They simply couldn’t hold the game any longer for engine optimizations and so on. When Crysis came, even the best card out (8800 Ultra) could not get past 15 fps on highest settings.
Here’s how it looked at the end of 2007:
httpÖ://cdnÖ.sweclockers.Öcom/artikel/diagram/266?key=f19d711c4dc554c3ae0c086e50720e0c
(just remove the ö’s lol)
I agree though, Ultra settings is a blast from the past. And I would really like to see it being implemented for users with Multi-GPU systems running the best hardware money can buy.
Similar cases dating back to the ’90s for that matter; Quake 3 was melting Voodoo GPU’s at the turn of the millennium, for example.
It’s only these days with the shift to a Multi-Platform focus that the “Melt PC’s” ideology has become completely mellowed out in favour of the insufferable “Lowest Common Hardware Denominator” ideology. Granted, if we were still using the “PC Master Race” ideology for AAA Development, we’d have a lot less high-profile Games per-year (higher costs, less income per-game) but we’d have far better Graphics as standard, & more/better features/quality per-game, unfortunately.
(Just piggybacking that on how the PS3/X360/Wii Consoles opened the floodgates for the subsequent “Console Focus & Video Game Mainstreaming” movement, & the “Lowest Common Gameplay Denominator” ideology which was formed as a result to maximize income & minimize costs. ZeniMax would still be getting browbeatings over their insane Horse Skin DLC if Consoles hadn’t paved the road for them to become so openly accepted, for example).
Though there may be some hope in in Star Citizen, based on the visuals we’ve been presented with so far. I guess we’ll just have to wait & see.
I7 to the Max? lol no way… I would like to see that.
Actually, the game is rather CPU intensive. But it’s not gonna make CPU’s work at near 100%, that’s not gonna happen with most games.
This game is a POS anyway. At least it could be a beautiful POS.
Well, I call games like LOL, WOW, DOTA, COD, CSGO, “POS” And looking at the amount of players I am clearly wrong. This means it’s down to personal preference.
You don’t like the gameplay of Division, so you should change your comment accordingly “You think this game is a POS based on your opinions alone”
Actually they are really POS, so you’re not wrong. Millions of flies cannot be wrong, eh?
I think you need to cool down your fanboyism, buddy. This online popamole experience hasn’t even came out yet, and you already worship it like it’s JC, commenting every post that says something bad about it.
Well, I don’t consider myself a fanboy, because I generally don’t like RPG games or games with RPG elements. Nor do I worship it. I’m more a guy who is looking for something different than what I usually play, and after player the Beta, I found it really enjoyable and different. The concept was good and all. But it could be executed a lot better. There’s many problems with The Division that is something many of us can agree on, but I have a strong feeling these will be addressed for the release of the retail game.
I also like Division because of its technical achievements and high
visual standards, as I’m a person who can think graphics alone can make a
great experience. Vanishing of Ethan Carter is one good example, I
played that mostly because of its impressive visuals, the gameplay
however was nothing for me, slow paced narrative game.
Now, I keep commenting when people have bad things to say about it who doesn’t back up their trashtalking with reasoning or valid arguments. I think you fail to understand that difference. I might look like a defending fanboy, but if you analyse the content of what I’m actually saying, you’d see that I have arguments that is valid and serves a good point. You just come in, upvoting others who just spits out there personal opinions or faulty judgements without backing it up. You yourself also come in and spit out your personal opinion in rude ways without giving any arguments to why. I myself think that comments in places like this should have a discussable value and that points made should be constructive and if one claims something, that person should be able to back it up with good arguments.
When you come in and posts comments like you did, then you also have to be prepared that people are gonna react and respond accordingly. Throwing rude trashtalks based on personal preference with nothing more to it, is only gonna make you look stupid.
It’s true but then again very obvious. Hardware being too weak is the main reason (if not the only) of game downgrades. In the perfect world with infinite computing power, making a beautiful game would be even easier than creating an ugly one…
yeah we are going to downgrade the PC version because of parity bulls**t but we are not going to bother to optimize it anyway. in the end we have a game that looks like a potato and runs like one.
Errr… Division ran beautifully for me, and looked so too. Optimization was great! 99% GPU and 80+% even load for all my CPU cores. 5.3 GB VRAM used too, I have 6GB 😀
well don’t know devision and don’t care about it but i said it because of what happens before and alot. watchdogs, it looked worst and it ran s**t. yeah devision looks good but still it’s a downgrade.
“Optimization was great”
that doesn’t mean anything. so a 6gb card can run it great. nice, lets wait and see how it will run on different and mid range PCs.
Well the beta ran great for me on single and sli on my 970’s with very little CPU usage on my 4770K. Right now the ultimate test is running Rise of the Tomb Raider with Textures on Very High. 4 / 6 gig cards are feeling the struggle.
Well. You’re right of course. It was optimized good for me. For AMD systems they didn’t get any driver update for Division beta, so people with Radeon cards had low fps, bad stuttering and loads of tearing 🙁
what i told you friend? you see now?
You told me a lot of rubbish about downgrades that didn’t exist. You posted videos where PC build was compared to Consoles builds and bad comparisons. You’re full of bulls*it that’s what you are. This news doesn’t confirm anything more than that the PC version is kept within similar range as the consoles. Even so, the PC version is still alot better than the console version.
with what draw distance an more FPS ? 😀 more shadows thanks to nvidia and you say this news donn t confirme anything ? give more argument tray harder 4K for pc version? 😀 with mods yo can run every game on 4K
You make no sense, you have poor English and you smell like a god*amn troll!!
read Carefully We do have to kind of keep it (the PC version) in check with the consoles; it would kind of be unfair just to push it so far away from them (the consoles)
You make no sense, you have poor English and you smell like a god*amn troll!
“not going to bother to optimize it anyway”
Please don’t say random things for no reason. The game looks great on PC compared to most other PC games, and it runs as you would expect such a game to run.
I agree it’s sad that PC games are downgraded for parity. It’s bullshit.
Even so, you really think that if they gave us those E3 graphics options, it would run just as well as what we have now ? Optimization isn’t some magic devs use to make a game run better just like that. Most of the time it involves some form of downgrade, (obviously as little as possible)
“it would run just as well as what we have now ?”
why not ? they ran great on E3 two years ago. and it’s not a random thing to say because we saw what ubisoft did in the past few years.
WHATTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. “unfair to push it so far away”. Go F yourself. That’s what i’m thinking. You had the assets and just end up hiding them because of consoles, jesus christ….
R.I.P to the reason we bought pc
If you bought a PC to play console ports you made a mistake.
suxs to be a pc gamer. to be honest. by their theory, then PS4 has to follow lowest denominator of XB1? why didnt they do that?
difference between ps4 and xbox is very slight, not even comparable to pc
This brutally confirms after all these e3 showing from developer were games build from high end hardware and then tone down to the consoles. SMH every damn time I hear this news..What is the freaking purpose of having a high end PC when the games are not being push to high fidelity… Quite frankly the consoles are the bread and butter and companies like Sony and MS will botch these developers into having the games cranked down level to there machines….
Yeah WTF! I mean, how long is this gonna prolong?? Let’s do the math: PeasantStation 3 and PeasantBox 360 held for 7 respective 8 years. PeasantStation 4 and PeasantBox One are 2 years and 3 months in. Does this mean that in 5-6 years from now we are gonna have the same story? Does this mean PC games in 2021 & 2022 will be technically held back by a 11-12 year old midrange class equivalent GPU just because otherwise it would SEEM UNFAIR????????????
Wow that logic just takes my breath away….
That’s what Sony/Microsoft are hoping/thinking, supposedly.
Personally I’m of half a mind that once Nvidia/AMD/Intel/etc. are done die-shrinking, Sony will take advantage of that to release a PS5, whereas Microsoft will complete its move to turn the Xbox into a “Media Hub” akin to the Apple TV, & step away from their strong focus on the Console Video Game Market in favour of their own version of the App Store, or whatnot.
Unfortunately, 10nm is expected “this” year (still in development last we heard, & previous die-shrinks have repeatedly had mass-production delays, so there’s that too), with 5nm expected “earliest” 2020 (probably 2021-2022, really), so yeah, we’re going to be fighting this war for a long, long time, just like how the PS3/X360’s should have been retired at least 2-3 years earlier, but Sony/Microsoft held out due to ever-increasing sales figures until even Developers started to hate how limited the breathing room was getting.
It’s the best opportunity I can see, personally, since 5nm will be even cheaper to manufacture than 22nm is right now (the smaller they get, the cheaper they are, not that it stops Nvidia from overpricing the sh*t out of their products), but it’s not like Console Manufacturers think logically, so we’ll see.
Of course, I’m not factoring in competition from Steam Hardware etc, so we’ll have to see how that affects the current “Internal Roadmaps” the Sony & Microsoft people have drawn up. If Steam Hardware (for example) offers strong competition, they might feel the urge to release an “interim” generation, but these “interim” Boxes would most likely be in the same price range as the PS4/XONE at Launch, hence we’d likely still be facing the restrictions that come with outdated mid-range Hardware, unfortunately.
Console ports are going to be held back by console hardware until the end of time, not just for the rest of this generation. It isn’t about fairness though, that’s just PR talk.
You should avoid the word peasant in your arguement as it ruins the credibility of the statement.
My hate for consoles and its players are never gonna cease until BS like this stopps! Console peasants are always gonna be console peasants as long as they support companies like MS and Sony. They are ruining the gaming industry, holds back technical progress, and representing a weak sauce community. If they want their simple “couch playing in living room social kind of thing” there are other better options than buying these cr*ppy consoles! One example is steam-machines.
It’s not meant to be serious ,console users take it too seriously and same with PC master race comments. Console users are raging about Doom4’s box art, I mean seriously lol.
Raging about Box Art really?, lol
Step 1: Stop putting your hopes in console ports.
This is why you don’t go buying fancy graphics cards, its futile
I disagree with you. Some of us like to game at much higher resolutions than just 1080p. If you want to game at 1440p or 2160p then you need to have your so called ‘fancy’ graphics cards.
That’s true. A reason why I wanted 6gb of Vram for my card. Some people
want more than high resolution for there money. This article is proof
that triple A publisher’s will not go out of their way to cater to them.
At least VR will give your card sweat soon.
honey,how are you
And isn’t that unfair to downgrade PC version when it can do much more ? This game started as something to “WOW” on but slowly becoming something that should be ignored entirely. I also heard it doesn’t have enough content except random encounters so it just looks like a typical MMO shooter with fancy skill trees and such.
Please…. Stop posting that video. He compares PC version to Console version, of course it looks worse.
The PC version however as they admited is still the best version of the game. So what they said is that it wil not be the next Doom 3 or the next Crysis but that still the pc version looks much better than consoles version. It will be instresting to see how much better far cy primal pc version will be because since it is a single player game so developers have the freedom to increase graphic qaulity much more than on a mmo
why the hell would this be “unfair” to them? they bought that willingly its not like they were duped into it
motherf*cker is not unfair, it’s not fkin unfair!!!!
Now let’s start boycott these castrated games on pc, surely at some point they’ll notice us, and hopefully take everything back in balance, as it was 10 yrs ago
Sadly it wouldn’t work.
I wouldn’t say that, pc players are still a big slice of their market
Whats up with this captain obvious thread/post? 🙂 We know the consoles hold us back. Its been like that for like 10 years.
We also know how much Ubisoft loves the consoles. They openly say it and act on it.
How is it unfair? You get what you pay for.
As every other pc game that has been ruined by consoles lol
Stop thinking of multiplats as PC games, they are ports.
so where is now fanboy Argued with me with his GTX 980ti card no division not was downgraded 🙂 what i told you?
This article is not about whether the game is downgraded or not. It’s about parity to the consoles. Your silly attempts at proving there are significant downgrades in the PC version compared to 2013 build failed hard, and are still not valid.
but massive is PC developers right? they created best RTS game world in conflict and now they sold their souls to ubisoft 🙁
This is true, one of the rare true comments made by you.
oh boy this is only true right? are you read this news or not? what this developer sad?
You make no sense, you have poor English and you smell like a god*amn troll!!!
It’s not fair to SONY and MICROSOFT get it?
So this means that on that HIGH SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS for PC it could be done better Graphics?That is an excuse for the Downgrade!It’s easy to say that because of SONY/MICROSOFT we had to lower,istead of real reason behind,since WATCH DOGS(DOWNGRADE)It was advertised at E3 that shown footage was running on a PS4 and at year of release the game was ugly and not only about graphics(explosions,animations,models etc)also on PC.SAME here with Division.REMEMBER FIRST PRESENTATION of this game at some playstation event(FOOTAGE FROM PS4)i know it was FAKE,but still why only UBI is doing it,the false advertise.Yes maybe a PS4 cannot do the E3 graphics but a PC sure can,with a 980ti an powerfull I7 and at least 16 DDR3 as memory that graphics in 2K could be reached.Or maybe they where like hey aPS4 is 400 $ and this is what we can squeze for our game,why not?for PC optimize the game for like 700$(so can a 700$ config can enjoy DIvision)I don’t know but UBISOFT are making the next Ghost Reacon….wait for IT.
positive points for honesty. it’s the first step toward the right direction. i doubt they are gonna take the next step though but at least it’s progress even if it may be a forced and fake one.
they got to stay close to the money right/.how many of you pc gamers got it from g2a,kinguin and gmg for $35 instead of $60?like i said they got to stay close to the money which is consoles.
the truth is a troll.
Whereas Console Gamers all pay $60+, instead of checking to see what prices G2A, Kinguin, CJ’s, etc. have? Come on, mate, we all do it, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it.
steam sells AAA titles for $60 at launch because its a legit and legal cd key reseller..so you think paying paying $35 from g2a is legit?..like i said they just want alittle of that pc money.they know where the REAL money comes from.the consoles.
“We do have to keep it in check with the consoles; it would be kind of unfair to push it so far away from them. ” – Why? The PC gamers have invested 2-3 times the amount of money and time in building, configuring a system that is obviously capable of producing far prettier games. Surely that’s unfair of Ubi to push it so far away from PC gamers? So long as the core game remains the same, I really don’t see the problem. Skewed logic.
Not sure if this still happens but Micro$oft used to require devs to sign an agreement that other platforms (aimed at PC) wouldnt be morethan like 10% better looking than the xbox version. not sure if this is still something they do but its generally kept quiet.
We’ve known that this has been going on for years within PC game development.
He just openly admitted and confirmed it. It is appauling really as they are just holding PC gaming back for the sake of these cheap consoles.
Yep, it is nothing new, but most of the times they just don’t outright say it. But it is also easier and cheaper for a multiplat developer to just start by making a game from the ground up with the common denominator in mind, and then give a few extras to the more powerful machinnes, than making the engine and the game from scratch with the most powerful platform in mind, and then realising that some decisions made are just not even possible on the consoles. Everyone knows that’s how it is, and how it makes sense.
Imagine a game being developed for a PC with a GTX 980ti in mind and aiming for the minimum of the 30 fps and having it look as best as possible (which is what they do for the consoles). The consoles would just run single digit framerates, if they could even run it at all, so let’s be honest, 90% of the gaming PCs these days would not be able to run that initial version of the game shown at E3 2013 at 1080p 60fps, and we know that how? The current downgraded version maxed out looks worse and a gtx 970 still drops below 60 fps at 1080p, and that is one of the most common gaming graphics cards around these days, and of the latest family from nvidia.
Let’s bash every scientists head with mallet until they become dumb as mentally challenged people, because it’s unfair to those handicapped people that there are much smarter people around doing useful things.
Looks like someone already bashed that developer on his head.
Another game I refuse to buy specifically because of sh*t like this.
I’m not gonna buy this game , Team Epiphany’s comment just gave me cancer
“it would be kind of unfair to push it so far away from them”
Clumsy PR lies. Fairness does not enter the equation, multiplat devs avoid forking into two incompatible builds because it doubles work hours / man power necessary.
Consoles are the bottleneck in multiplats so they are always the lead platform. It’s not even about sales. Sales determine whether multiplat itself is a viable concept. If the consoles or the PC dropped in sales we would stop seeing multiplats. But we will never ever see a multiplat that “leads” on PC and “ports” to console. Has never happened and will never happen.
Note: Multiplat = simultaneous development, not porting a game later.
more like consoles are the money makers.. the pc community had to petition it to get the game on pc. it was meant to compete with destiny or destiny 2. you know this is a pve game right?
the pve zones are 3-4 times larger then the dark zone. how long do you think mindless group gank pvp will last on the pc not long at all. this game was made for consoles thats why a gtx 970 can barley ultra/60fps it.
“the pc community had to petition it to get the game on pc.”
I still think some if not most of these petitions are astroturfed. Ubisoft in particular release all their games on PC. Remember when they made two AC games in one year (Rogue and Unity) they ported BOTH of them to PC! Ubisoft must be selling okay on PC or they wouldn’t do all that, and continue to push for their uplay client etc. Ubisoft clearly sees huge profits to be made on PC. I don’t believe a petition was ever needed. But I could see Ubisoft using paid shills to boost said petition to make PC gamers think other PC gamers were excited about the game.
I agree that PVE is bad and due to input methods even more boring on PC than on consoles. But since when do you see things that way? I vividly remember you posting you prefer to play on Xbox One.
the game is meant for pve thats why the pve zones are 3-4 time larger then the dark zone.
PR != the truth
It’s not about “fairness”, “fairness” is not an economic term.
Played the beta and not buying the game.
Oh shut the f**k up!
Agree, I have an i7 2600K @4GHz + GTX 980 and I can’t play at 60fps (just 45-55 fps)
lets hope the open beta if they have one is optimized.
Enjoy your sub 30FPS, console peasants.
Thanks!
lol what you arent getting is that EVERY dev does this. its just the way it works. The only difference here is ubi has the balls to talk about it in this case instead of just acting like it didnt happen. seriously tho EVERY dev does this, if its a multiplatform game then this is happening