Ue5 has yet to prove itself on console. Matrix looked neat, but it was an unstable showing in performance and iq. Long way to go yet.
Naughty Dog confirms PC will be in their development pipeline going forward
- Thread starter DynamiteCop
- Start date
- Status
Not sure what you all expected when we were told by Sony their live service titles (one of which ND is making) will be console and PC Day and Date.
D
Deleted member 13
Guest
True. My point is that it's a multiplat engine and it works fine with all platforms for games.
But so far lacking optimisation customary with dedicated platform. Anyway moot point, I’m sure they will iron out a lot of things and ultimately you’re right, cross platform can still show the money.
D
Deleted member 13
Guest
Yup unless the game is completely GPU limited - which is the case for nearly every game this generation. I think it's way more common to find graphics limitations over CPU limitations.
If your target is high resolution, then yes. Some concession has to be made for lower end hardware. The Steam Deck renders better visuals than both PS4/PS5 in the case of GoW 2018 because it's GPU limited and scaling the resolution to 800p and locking the FPS = 30 offers a visual advantage from the increased graphic featureset level (i.e. anisotropic filtering = 16x, LOD, texture resolution, more accurate AO, etc..)
Agreed.
"Much like players can enjoy UNCHARTED: Legacy of Thieves Collection on PC from a variety of PC builds, our developers can work on PC iterations on various pieces of hardware from home or in the office."
I didn't thought about this. Games for these consoles are way less dependent on devkits as consoles of several generations ago, and during a big chunk of the development they don't need devkits. Even if x86 based they still need the devkits, but it's true that if the game is also coming to PC there's a bigger part of the development that can be developed without a devkit, meaning they can work only with their PC at home making the development way more flexible.
In many cases, specially with multiplatform engines like UE or Unity, even if games were commerciallly released as console only many devs made PC builds for internal development and testing to don't need constantly devkits and testkits. I assume this means they'll do it for ND game too, while keeping a lot of work done to make a PC port way easier later in the road:
"In doing so, we set the stage for Naughty Dog to deliver high-quality games on PlayStation 5, with the option of a PC release as well, with an understanding of how to cater to the different needs of both audiences now and in the future.
UNCHARTED: Legacy of Thieves Collection has created a tremendous foundation of technology and learnings that will only benefit our future development. "
I didn't thought about this. Games for these consoles are way less dependent on devkits as consoles of several generations ago, and during a big chunk of the development they don't need devkits. Even if x86 based they still need the devkits, but it's true that if the game is also coming to PC there's a bigger part of the development that can be developed without a devkit, meaning they can work only with their PC at home making the development way more flexible.
In many cases, specially with multiplatform engines like UE or Unity, even if games were commerciallly released as console only many devs made PC builds for internal development and testing to don't need constantly devkits and testkits. I assume this means they'll do it for ND game too, while keeping a lot of work done to make a PC port way easier later in the road:
"In doing so, we set the stage for Naughty Dog to deliver high-quality games on PlayStation 5, with the option of a PC release as well, with an understanding of how to cater to the different needs of both audiences now and in the future.
UNCHARTED: Legacy of Thieves Collection has created a tremendous foundation of technology and learnings that will only benefit our future development. "
Last edited:
Honestly, Sony should just go all the way in or not. Staying vague and inbetween is really frustrating.
Me and many people want to play the best version of their games day one. I don't want to wait a year and I don't double dio. Just make all games day one so we buy RTX 4090.
And make their own app with big screen mode.
Me and many people want to play the best version of their games day one. I don't want to wait a year and I don't double dio. Just make all games day one so we buy RTX 4090.
And make their own app with big screen mode.
This is not true, Sony said that for Bungie games but not for PS Studios games. Hermen included many conditionals, when said about PS Studios GaaS titles that "some" "possibly" "could" "eventually" released on PC day and date.
Sony already released several live service games like Dreams, Destruction All Stars, Gran Turismo 7 and MLB21 or MLB2 and none of them have been released day one on PC. Some PS Studios games may be released day and date, others won't.
He said even that interview that their focus will be releasing their games on PS5 only, specially the non GaaS SP focused games like the traditional ND ones. These ones would be released on PS5 only and if ever ported to PC (not all Sony games will be ported to PC) would be released at least a year after their original PS release.
Sony has been very clear. PS5 will continue being the only platform where they will release all their PS Studios games and in day one. Some of them, not all, will be ported to PC years later. In the case of the SP or non GaaS AT LEAST one year later after their original PS release (meaning most will be released years later). And in the case of GaaS, some of them might be released day one on PC.
This blog post only say that since pretty likely future ND games might end being released on PC now their engine supports it and will consider PC when developing their games, something that helps development specially when working remotely from home and later to ease the work for the porters.
Being the most successful CEO for a console maker in gaming history.
Last edited:
It is, and LBP was too before it. They have a live ops team developing post launch content, features and fixes during years, also taking care of servers, ports or dlc, etc.
D
Deleted member 13
Guest
According to some Sony gamers here, it's useless to buy the 4090 as games are made with low end hardware in mind and the graphics featureset will only allow low settings with low FPS and low resolution 1440p. Basically buy a Series S and call it a day.
That's not strictly true.
Buy a 4090 and know that it will not be fully utilised for years to come. A quick look at the benchmarks tells you all you need to know.
So your high-end card will see no software designed to make best use of capabilities in the near future, which wasn't the case in the PC gaming world in previous gens. Oh and it's the best part of £2,000.
Not much I have to say about this anymore tbh, we'll see how it pans out. If they ensure their minimum spec on PC is at least roughly around PS5 in configuration, then we shouldn't worry too much about optimization strain in the pipeline. Although the min spec on PC would change depending on the needs of the game; I'm just saying if it's a AAA game meant to "push the PS5's limits", then the min spec on PC should at least be roughly equivalent to the PS5's performance profile otherwise that's not being truthful.
I'm curious how this may affect timing intervals for releases going from PS5 to PC going forward. Genuinely I'm thinking now the gaps are going to get shorter, and we'll probably see at least a couple of 1P AAA non live-service/GaaS games be Day 1 on PC before the end of the generation. However, I also think it's all tied to plans for their own PC launcher & storefront, otherwise I just see too much left on the table pushing that strategy through Steam, not even to mention the advantages buyers of the games on PC would get that PS5 losers miss out on.
We should probably prepare for other PS 1P studios to come out with similar statements over the next few months, FWIW. Depending on how they plan to handle ports to PC going forward for the non live-service games, I'm most likely going to go PC for Sony, Microsoft and most 3P content this gen, and get a Switch 2 for Nintendo's games (if the specs are reasonably good for the price). I'm assuming PSVR2 will be PC-compatible as well, which would be pretty cool.
Absolutely true, and it's something Sony's studios have to be mindful of going forward if they're going to support PC more. If the timing interval for ports to PC shortens even further (or goes Day 1, particularly for non-live service games), that's a lot more hardware configs devs have to scope, design and optimize their game around out of the gate, and that can definitely mean less of them pushing certain hardware (such as PS5 in this case) to their absolute limits.
Even though I think budgets, time and manpower are the bigger limitations for huge AAA games these days, exploiting specific hardware specs to their peak is still really important for the cream of the crop games showing off what a system can do, and those usually tend to be the 1P games when it comes to Sony's systems. There may be neat tricks with Tempest Engine that can be exploited at a technical level that could get looked over for a future game if it also has to be scoped out with some lower-end PC config in mind.
The good thing with PC is the minimum spec can always increase and depends on the game; the issue there though is total amount of market penetration for certain GPUs in the PC gaming space. Right now the top 5 GPUs on Steam are: GTX 1060 (2016, 4.375 TF, 6.94%), GTX 1650 (2019, 2.984 TF, 6.32%), RTX 2060 2019, 6.45 TF, 5.19%), GTX 1050 Ti (2016, 2.138 TF, 4.91%), and RTX 3060 Laptop (Max-Q) (2021, 9.846 TF, 4%). There's definitely a GPU roughly equivalent to PS5's in that list, but it's dead last for 4% of the market. The top 5 altogether account for less than 30% of the total Steam GPU market, though among the Top 15 there are some other RTX 3060 and up GPUs in the mix.
Kind of wild that the top GPU, though, is still one that is 4 years older than the PS5 and less than half its performance in TF, much less pixel and texture fillrate as well. It's just somewhat more performant than a Series S from the looks of it. Let's hope GPU adoption for GPUs at around PS5's level jumps up considerably within the next year or two; I'm assuming most of the big spenders in terms of actually buying games on stores like Steam normally have the more performant GPUs. That's what I'd hope, anyway, because it'd mean for future ports of 1P games meant to really push the PS5 hardware, Sony teams don't have to worry about appealing to more than say 12% of the total PC gaming market because vast majority of their customers would be the ones with those 12% of the upper-end (around PS5 perf level) anyway.
I still think the 1660 or 1660 Ti are the most popular GPUs on PC; I would figure that GPU & a decently capable CPU at the time of its release would've given performance roughly on par with a PS4 Pro or One X, but that GPU came out 3 years after PS4 Pro and 2 years after the One X.
Do you have documentation on other custom engines to say that definitively? I don't think other engines would have exact things like Nanite & Lumen, but there are likely at least some with features that provide similar benefits and results to what Nanite & Lumen do.
It's like the people who want to say PS5 doesn't have SFS. Well yeah obviously it doesn't have SFS, but it certainly has means within the way it's I/O system is built and the APIs to provide results similar to SFS. Not to mention, SFS is MS's specific branding for a package of solutions doing the heavy lifting, similar to how Nanite & Lumen are branding-specific by Epic for similar reasons.
I'm curious how this may affect timing intervals for releases going from PS5 to PC going forward. Genuinely I'm thinking now the gaps are going to get shorter, and we'll probably see at least a couple of 1P AAA non live-service/GaaS games be Day 1 on PC before the end of the generation. However, I also think it's all tied to plans for their own PC launcher & storefront, otherwise I just see too much left on the table pushing that strategy through Steam, not even to mention the advantages buyers of the games on PC would get that PS5 losers miss out on.
We should probably prepare for other PS 1P studios to come out with similar statements over the next few months, FWIW. Depending on how they plan to handle ports to PC going forward for the non live-service games, I'm most likely going to go PC for Sony, Microsoft and most 3P content this gen, and get a Switch 2 for Nintendo's games (if the specs are reasonably good for the price). I'm assuming PSVR2 will be PC-compatible as well, which would be pretty cool.
That's fair, but with any piece of code, the less hardware you have to account for (as well as APIs, etc) the easier it is to optimize and get every last CPU cycle to render what you want on screen. Games like TLOU 2 would never run on a PC that's not substantially better than the PS4 as a whole package. Hell, just compare the minimum CPU requirements for GoW on PC vs what the PS4 offers.
AMD Jaguar vs AMD Ryzen 3 1200
Comparison between AMD Jaguar and AMD Ryzen 3 1200 with the specifications of the processors, the number of cores, threads, cache memory, also the performance in benchmark platforms such as Geekbench, Passmark, Cinebench or AnTuTu.gadgetversus.com
In spite of having more cores, both the PS4 and PS4 pro pale in comparison with the Ryzen 3 1200. Unless a company is not being their usual lazy self with ports, more platforms to develop for usually = less of a specific hardware combination being exploited to its maximum, even if that HW is also X86.
Absolutely true, and it's something Sony's studios have to be mindful of going forward if they're going to support PC more. If the timing interval for ports to PC shortens even further (or goes Day 1, particularly for non-live service games), that's a lot more hardware configs devs have to scope, design and optimize their game around out of the gate, and that can definitely mean less of them pushing certain hardware (such as PS5 in this case) to their absolute limits.
Even though I think budgets, time and manpower are the bigger limitations for huge AAA games these days, exploiting specific hardware specs to their peak is still really important for the cream of the crop games showing off what a system can do, and those usually tend to be the 1P games when it comes to Sony's systems. There may be neat tricks with Tempest Engine that can be exploited at a technical level that could get looked over for a future game if it also has to be scoped out with some lower-end PC config in mind.
The good thing with PC is the minimum spec can always increase and depends on the game; the issue there though is total amount of market penetration for certain GPUs in the PC gaming space. Right now the top 5 GPUs on Steam are: GTX 1060 (2016, 4.375 TF, 6.94%), GTX 1650 (2019, 2.984 TF, 6.32%), RTX 2060 2019, 6.45 TF, 5.19%), GTX 1050 Ti (2016, 2.138 TF, 4.91%), and RTX 3060 Laptop (Max-Q) (2021, 9.846 TF, 4%). There's definitely a GPU roughly equivalent to PS5's in that list, but it's dead last for 4% of the market. The top 5 altogether account for less than 30% of the total Steam GPU market, though among the Top 15 there are some other RTX 3060 and up GPUs in the mix.
Kind of wild that the top GPU, though, is still one that is 4 years older than the PS5 and less than half its performance in TF, much less pixel and texture fillrate as well. It's just somewhat more performant than a Series S from the looks of it. Let's hope GPU adoption for GPUs at around PS5's level jumps up considerably within the next year or two; I'm assuming most of the big spenders in terms of actually buying games on stores like Steam normally have the more performant GPUs. That's what I'd hope, anyway, because it'd mean for future ports of 1P games meant to really push the PS5 hardware, Sony teams don't have to worry about appealing to more than say 12% of the total PC gaming market because vast majority of their customers would be the ones with those 12% of the upper-end (around PS5 perf level) anyway.
I still think the 1660 or 1660 Ti are the most popular GPUs on PC; I would figure that GPU & a decently capable CPU at the time of its release would've given performance roughly on par with a PS4 Pro or One X, but that GPU came out 3 years after PS4 Pro and 2 years after the One X.
Do you have documentation on other custom engines to say that definitively? I don't think other engines would have exact things like Nanite & Lumen, but there are likely at least some with features that provide similar benefits and results to what Nanite & Lumen do.
It's like the people who want to say PS5 doesn't have SFS. Well yeah obviously it doesn't have SFS, but it certainly has means within the way it's I/O system is built and the APIs to provide results similar to SFS. Not to mention, SFS is MS's specific branding for a package of solutions doing the heavy lifting, similar to how Nanite & Lumen are branding-specific by Epic for similar reasons.
Last edited:
How would PC not be in their development pipeline? Sony already stated Gaas games would also be on PC day one, we all know this includes games such as The Last of Us Factions which will more than likely be a huge mp/gaas game. What am I missing with this news? This was confirmed over a month ago.
- Status