{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/16/2014 12:32:10 PM
36
Please know this: Legacy Generation systems did not limit the performance of Next Generation builds of Destiny.
Destiny exists as a central design build on proprietary Bungie hardware. That's nerdese for the fact that we use our own machines to build a game that is completely unaware of where it will live. From there, we identify where it can thrive, and create a version that will make the most of each separate home. There are four versions of Destiny, and they each fill the space they're given in their own ways.
Hope this helps. Keep asking us your questions. We might still shoot you, but it will happen in acceptable forms found in the Crucible.
Hugs and buckshot,
DeeJ
English
-
Edited by SeekerofPower17: 8/18/2014 3:29:34 PMBut that completely contradicts this statement: “It’s a lot of different things,” explains Jason Sussman who is the senior environment artist at Bungie. “I could get really technical, but I’d bore you to death. A lot has to do with performance. We’re cross-platform, so we had to be very delicate with all four consoles, making sure they have the same experience, that it looks as good as it possibly can on all these consoles. A lot goes into that, from geometry to textures to post effects to particles to how many players you get on the screen. We’re always balancing that out to make sure everyone gets the same experience.” This states that performance had to be balances so that everyone gets the same experience. That sounds like the game was held back in order to allow it to run the same on Legacy systems as it does on Next-gen systems. I don't have an issue with this at all and feel the game should be available to as many folks as possible, but I find it hard to believe that it wasn't limited by its lowest denominator.
-
And this answers that... Can people now stop saying "oh last gen held bungie back.." Morons.
-
"There are 4 version of Destiny" [spoiler]Hahaha You all know the truth now. No more fighting.[/spoiler]
-
Slugs. FTW
-
Yeah, but all in all they are holding new gen back.
-
How so?
-
By making it popular. Everyone knows that once something becomes popular, it must not be any good, right? </sarc>
-
Edited by ManBearPigIets: 8/17/2014 11:58:12 AMAs much as I love verbal flourishes, you guys really don't help yourselves any when you phrase things in a way that the average moron (you know, the vocal ones populating this forum) will misinterpret it because they either suck at English or are just cognitively deficient.
-
-
You mean the PS3 and 360 versions are even worse? How are the N64 and Dreamcast versions? GOOD JOB! 10/10 - IGN
-
Nice job being someone who doesn't understand anything that is being said. Slow clap for you.
-
Haha thanks for tuning in DeeJ, always appreciated.
-
Edited by TheHajii: 8/16/2014 1:26:01 PMWhy did you opt for 30 fps instead of 60 fps?
-
So it could be prettier. Same as any game. It could have been 60fps on all systems but it would mean dialling the graphics back.
-
That contradicts what he just said... "Please know this: Legacy Generation systems did not limit the performance of Next Generation builds of Destiny." So that would imply they didn't go with 30 fps so it would look good on all systems. If that's the case, then why did they??
-
What I'm saying is each individual console could have had 60 fps but they would need to drop the graphics settings on any system to get there. Each system is independant if the others. They could have randomly decided to make only the 360 60fps if they wanted but it would look a lot worse than it does now. Next gen versions would still look better but but not as good as they do now. Things like shorter draw distance, less dynamic lighting, lower quality shadows and reflections. There will be some game design choices that the last gen will have restricted (read some of the Arkham Knight articles) but frame rate won't have been.
-
Raising the frames per second won't cause any major graphical concessions on console systems-- you can't exaggerate that the PS3 would only display graphics comparable to the PS2 era because of raised FPS. The PS4 could handle 60 FPS and 1080p resolution on multiple titles, so your argument doesn't quite hold up.
-
Man, I give up. It's like bashing my head against a -blam!-ing brick wall. Go to a friends house with a gaming pc and ask him to give you a demonstration of graphical settings and how they affect frame rate.
-
puts pillows everywhere, now bash away :D
-
[quote]puts pillows everywhere, now bash away :D[/quote] Can I bash them too lol
-
hmm pillow fight?! Guess its better then a bloody mess.
-
Let them be dumb, and jump on the 60fps bandwagon. What they fail to realize is that doubling the Frames Per Second also doubles the number of graphics renders, which can take a toll on any system (Titanfall goes all fuzzy sometimes because it "optimizes" HD content to 60fps and ends up sacrificing detail in graphics to keep up with the frame rate). Maybe next time DeeJ should spell it out in crayon for them.
-
The Last of Us Remastered runs like a dream at 60 fps. Single player and multi player. However, the ground work was already laid down for this game and all Naughty Dog had to do was tweak it for ps4. Just making a point. Either way, Destiny looked amazing on ps4 during the beta, it ran smoothly as well. No complaints from me about how the game looks.
-
Exactly! So, previous gen consoles DID limit the performance of next gen consoles. I guarantee PS4 could have pushed destiny at 1080p 60 fps. Dude I get what you're saying and I believe you're right, it just contradicts that Deej and Bungie are saying.
-
How do you guarantee that destiny could hit 1080p 60fps?
