PDA

View Full Version : Do devs not care about console?



THIs_GUY_17
07-17-2018, 09:51 AM
The constant light spam is ridiculous and annoying im tired of guessing right on where to block next and still get hit by a light over and over again

Siegfried-Z
07-17-2018, 02:57 PM
Sempiternal Question ^^

Villarejo97
07-17-2018, 04:27 PM
The constant light spam is ridiculous and annoying im tired of guessing right on where to block next and still get hit by a light over and over again
Maybe they are blind or something

SenBotsu893
07-17-2018, 04:56 PM
short answer: NO

long answer:

revenue generated by console players are apreciated BUT

-----> every balancing change is focused around pc <----

dont be deceived by public relation bs.

DefiledDragon
07-17-2018, 07:25 PM
I don't get it. What's the difference?

CandleInTheDark
07-17-2018, 08:04 PM
I don't get it. What's the difference?

People will claim FPS, because the myth is that it makes a huge difference. FPS provides a 33ms difference at most (it depends on when the next frame is due) and unless players are elite level that makes zero difference.

The thing is that people don't play console games optimally and like PC that makes a difference, this isn't some fair gaming utopia where everyone pays the same price and they all have the same chance in competitive games. The controller being wireless can add up to 50ms, using a wireless router the same, not having gaming mode on the television can add 150 ms (near five times the FPS difference).

Ubisoft cannot balance for some people don't have good setups, they want to go towards esports which means they need to balance for the top (very small) percent and for those people having optimal setups. Say the devs do though, it changes nothing, there will still be people with better setups who will now be able to parry ridiculously easily. At most the devs should add an extra 33ms lag compensation on console over PC, that would make the in game factors equal, they would still get wtf can't block or parry on console threads though.

Knight_Raime
07-18-2018, 09:52 AM
Light spam is a player made issue coming from lower skill brackets of players. Good console players do not die to "light spam."
But the console argument is just a crutch argument to begin with.

SenBotsu893
07-18-2018, 04:44 PM
Light spam is a player made issue coming from lower skill brackets of players. Good console players do not die to "light spam."
But the console argument is just a crutch argument to begin with.

play both versions yourself and you will see the difference.

what the guy above your post said is pretty much the explanation as to why. it is not about skill, it is about hardware advantage.

it is harder to react to fast attacks when you have to compensate for lower refresh rate and input lag.

CandleInTheDark
07-18-2018, 05:09 PM
play both versions yourself and you will see the difference.

what the guy above your post said is pretty much the explanation as to why. it is not about skill, it is about hardware advantage.

it is harder to react to fast attacks when you have to compensate for lower refresh rate and input lag.

I have played both versions, and I played console with a gaming television and without, FPS is a much smaller difference than getting an optimised setup. 33 ms compared to a potential 250 ms if your tv isn't up to it, you are on a wireless router and use wireless controllers. Console is not the fair gaming platform people believe, like PC, it is who has the best setup.

Knight_Raime
07-18-2018, 06:15 PM
play both versions yourself and you will see the difference.

what the guy above your post said is pretty much the explanation as to why. it is not about skill, it is about hardware advantage.

it is harder to react to fast attacks when you have to compensate for lower refresh rate and input lag.

My standard console setup is a wired connection with a decent monitor. I compared that with my normal setup but with an older LCD tv and then played on pc.
I felt the biggest difference with my console setup switching from an old LCD to a decent monitor.

The jump from console to pc is not a "big difference" for everyone. Because people's reaction times differ. I'd assume mine are higher than average if I were to use this forum as my indicator. I'd imagine if you have a beefy pc that can handle really high FPS/refresh rates the difference would be bigger. But jumping from 30fps to 60fps alone in FH's case is not that big of a deal. Especially when the time you are allotted to react is the same.

Having a higher fps/refresh rate just means you see more detail in animations. Which is indeed helpful. but is not instantly so for all. the effect it has is hard to quantify since it's more of a feel than an actual change in how something works. If we were comparing PC for honor to console for honor before they added in the lag comp system I could agree that 60fps was miles more helpful. However the lag comp system smoothed console out in a very big way.

So these days either people have a very poor setup for their system or poor internet connections. You can no longer blame frames alone.

SenBotsu893
07-18-2018, 06:15 PM
it is not about skill, it is about hardware advantage.




Console is not the fair gaming platform people believe, like PC, it is who has the best setup.

thx for reiterating my point.

its hard for me to tell if the fps or the controller input lag (possibly the combination of both)
but parrying 500ms is no problem for me on pc but on my ps4 it is sometimes even hard to simply block them.

it is literally a night and day difference.

CandleInTheDark
07-18-2018, 06:22 PM
thx for reiterating my point.

its hard for me to tell if the fps or the controller input lag (possibly the combination of both)
but parrying 500ms is no problem for me on pc but on my ps4 it is sometimes even hard to simply block them.

it is literally a night and day difference.

And parrying was also a lot easier on an xbox with a gaming tv and the controller wired in. My point is that most of the difference is in the palyer's control (if some of it costs money, that's the same as PC gaming), at most the fps is 33ms and that by itself doesn't make a difference unless you have twitch reflexes.

I honestly think the devs should add 33ms lag compensation to consoles over pc, that would make all in game factors the same, but you would still have people arguing that they can't block or parry.

SenBotsu893
07-18-2018, 06:29 PM
My standard console setup is a wired connection with a decent monitor. I compared that with my normal setup but with an older LCD tv and then played on pc.
I felt the biggest difference with my console setup switching from an old LCD to a decent monitor.

The jump from console to pc is not a "big difference" for everyone. Because people's reaction times differ. I'd assume mine are higher than average if I were to use this forum as my indicator. I'd imagine if you have a beefy pc that can handle really high FPS/refresh rates the difference would be bigger. But jumping from 30fps to 60fps alone in FH's case is not that big of a deal. Especially when the time you are allotted to react is the same.

Having a higher fps/refresh rate just means you see more detail in animations. Which is indeed helpful. but is not instantly so for all. the effect it has is hard to quantify since it's more of a feel than an actual change in how something works. If we were comparing PC for honor to console for honor before they added in the lag comp system I could agree that 60fps was miles more helpful. However the lag comp system smoothed console out in a very big way.

So these days either people have a very poor setup for their system or poor internet connections. You can no longer blame frames alone.

true most of our parrys are done more on muscle memory than actual visual confirmation.

i would still argue that the jump from 30 fps to 140+ fps is still a big help. 60 fps is kinda unrealisticly low for a gaming pc although its arguable if your eyes can actually get much boon from anything above 60 fps.

still point is even on console there can be hardware advantages. (wonder if custom controllers have less input lag too than standard ones?)

TheTool85
07-18-2018, 07:18 PM
Having a higher fps/refresh rate just means you see more detail in animations. Which is indeed helpful. but is not instantly so for all. the effect it has is hard to quantify since it's more of a feel than an actual change in how something works. If we were comparing PC for honor to console for honor before they added in the lag comp system I could agree that 60fps was miles more helpful. However the lag comp system smoothed console out in a very big way.



Do you or does anybody know if the difference in fps has an influence on indicators showing up? Or has this been egalized with the lag comp system too ( if it ever was an issue)?
Would be great if someone could explain :)
Thx!

Knight_Raime
07-18-2018, 08:53 PM
true most of our parrys are done more on muscle memory than actual visual confirmation.

i would still argue that the jump from 30 fps to 140+ fps is still a big help. 60 fps is kinda unrealisticly low for a gaming pc although its arguable if your eyes can actually get much boon from anything above 60 fps.

still point is even on console there can be hardware advantages. (wonder if custom controllers have less input lag too than standard ones?)


Well yes. Going from 30fps to 140fps is a big jump in detail. And if you're a serious gamer then you probably have a setup that can do that. I'm assuming most players like myself that would make the initial jump to pc would not have the funds to make a rig that is capable of doing that immediately. My pc costed me just a hairs breath over 800$ USD. and that was without a monitor or graphics card. I got my graphics card from a friend who helped me make the pc. His was a few years old and he was upgrading to a new one. and I already had a decent monitor. I wouldn't know about custom controllers. I just use the standard xbox one controller.


Do you or does anybody know if the difference in fps has an influence on indicators showing up? Or has this been egalized with the lag comp system too ( if it ever was an issue)?
Would be great if someone could explain :)
Thx!

Frames have no impact on how long/how soon indicators show up. All added frames do is give more detail to what you're seeing. Which technically means you could react better. But factually speaking having more frames does not give you more time to react. a true 400ms light is still 233ms of reaction time wether you're on a pc with 160fps or on console with 30fps.

TheTool85
07-18-2018, 09:13 PM
Thank you , for your reply!
So that would mean that the frames are not directly combined with the indicator at all, am i right? And if so, do you have a clue how this indicator showing up is connected to the attacks? Sorry to bother you with these stupid questions :)

Knight_Raime
07-18-2018, 11:12 PM
Thank you , for your reply!
So that would mean that the frames are not directly combined with the indicator at all, am i right? And if so, do you have a clue how this indicator showing up is connected to the attacks? Sorry to bother you with these stupid questions :)

That's not exactly true per se. Let me try to word it a little better. Lets as an example think of Warden's top heavy. Basically the moment he starts the attack you'll see the red indicator. This indicator will stay around until the attack is complete or it has been interrupted some how. During this indicator there will be a time in which it will flash white. This means this is when you would input a parry.
Having more frames does not extend how long you see the red indicator. Nor does it extend how long the indicator will flash white for the parry time.

Or to put it numbers if warden's top heavy is 800ms it's still 800ms with the higher frames number. The animation of the attack itself is just going to look more smooth at 140fps then it would at 30fps. All having a higher frame rate does is makes what you're viewing look more detailed.

It's not that frames don't have zero connection to indicators. They just don't have any barring on the timings of things.

DefiledDragon
07-18-2018, 11:43 PM
People will claim FPS, because the myth is that it makes a huge difference. FPS provides a 33ms difference at most (it depends on when the next frame is due) and unless players are elite level that makes zero difference.

The thing is that people don't play console games optimally and like PC that makes a difference, this isn't some fair gaming utopia where everyone pays the same price and they all have the same chance in competitive games. The controller being wireless can add up to 50ms, using a wireless router the same, not having gaming mode on the television can add 150 ms (near five times the FPS difference).

Ubisoft cannot balance for some people don't have good setups, they want to go towards esports which means they need to balance for the top (very small) percent and for those people having optimal setups. Say the devs do though, it changes nothing, there will still be people with better setups who will now be able to parry ridiculously easily. At most the devs should add an extra 33ms lag compensation on console over PC, that would make the in game factors equal, they would still get wtf can't block or parry on console threads though.

Ahh right, ok thanks, now I get it.