The Division got delayed until 2016

"Tone_E wrote:

There are levels of global illumination but should that really impress anyone these days? I don't think so.

I disagree. Lighting in games has been strictly controlled and basically artificially sourced. You can make anything a light source, even a brick wall. It's staged and fake. Shadows and lighting volume has always been strictly defined by the level creator, so it's less about consistency and more about what the world creator thought looked good at that exact moment. Look at Fallout games, and how interiors with no light sources are somehow illuminated enough that you can see your way around them.

Frostbite has good GI, but I haven't played a wide variety of games to compare with really.

Frostbite has GI but not dynamic GI. That is, there is no calculation for reflected light bouncing off an object. The light goes one way and stops. This is dynamic GI on a console, which is very damn good.

All programmed and run on PC with emulators. That's what was shown at E3, a demo run in Windows with twin NVIdia Titans in SLI for all we know.

It's false advertising as far as I'm concerned.

I just said that. :lol: And yes, many show floor demos are running on hidden PCs with Xbox controllers attached. That's an open secret. They're giving you a representative sample of an in development project, not a demo of a final product.

"Tone_E wrote:

I think it is classic bait and switch. They were advertising at E3 all of the above mentioned features of the engine and as the video points out it was never even supposed to be released on PC, which should suggest that everything they showed WAS capable of being rendered on next gen consoles. It's terrible if you ask me, very bad business practice. Hype for pre orders and then you get a fraction of the product you paid for.

Maybe I'm more upset than I should be, but it's a matter of principle and holding these companies accountable for their misleading and downright false claims.

There's absolutely no situation where a pre-order should force you to buy it should you change your mind, so yes it failed to live up to the hype, but you still control if you pay for it. You're getting what you paid for, you're not paying for the 4 minute demo from 3 years ago because that's not what they're selling or even purporting to sell currently.

I regularly cancel pre-orders for movies and games when they fail to meet my requirements for immediate purchase.

"Tone_E wrote:

There are levels of global illumination but should that really impress anyone these days? I don't think so. The extent that UBI Soft advertised at E3 as referenced in the video i posted is enough to impress because I don't think we've seen it done at that scale and or extent before, especially on a console. Frostbite has good GI, but I haven't played a wide variety of games to compare with really.

That's just the lighting alone. Never mind the downgrade in textures vs. a version they were explicitly showing on a PS4 at E3, with a windowed view of the controller the person was using in the demo. People don't understand PC rules. PS4 game? XBone game? All programmed and run on PC with emulators. That's what was shown at E3, a demo run in Windows with twin NVIdia Titans in SLI for all we know.

It's false advertising as far as I'm concerned.

I don't recall it being shown on a ps4, just with a Dualshock4 controller.

"Stitches wrote:

I don't recall it being shown on a ps4, just with a Dualshock4 controller.

Check out 16:00 - 17:00 of the video I posted.

"Tone_E wrote:

Check out 16:00 - 17:00 of the video I posted.

Exactly, it shows just the controller, it never shows the console.

"Stitches wrote:

Exactly, it shows just the controller, it never shows the console.

You ever consider enrolling in law school? Technically you are right I guess. Technically. They did say it was running on a PS4 development kit. Not sure how else to take that.

"Tone_E wrote:

You ever consider enrolling in law school? Technically you are right I guess. Technically. They did say it was running on a PS4 development kit. Not sure how else to take that.

PS4 development kits are specialized PCs running the console OS, or at least parts of the console OS. Game development isn't done directly on the consoles themselves. The development kits are specced higher than the consoles, which is why a direct feed screenshot off a development kit will look better than your final game running on a console.

"Tone_E wrote:

You ever consider enrolling in law school? Technically you are right I guess. Technically. They did say it was running on a PS4 development kit. Not sure how else to take that.

Plenty of times.

In fact I regularly get similar comments at work because I don't make definitive statements that can come back and bite me. :lol:

As for the development kit, sorry I wasn't watching the video with sound, so I didn't hear them say it was on a dev kit.

I understand the devkit and the fact it was running on a pc for the demo, but not many people do. There's tons of reddit posts where Xbox and PS4 displays at shows (CES, Gamescon, etc) crash to desktop and people are like "omg it was running on a pc" etc. However, what they did, by way of advertising and insinuation suggests the level of quality shown is representative of what people can expect for the final product on next gen consoles.

Shady in my opinion, but lets leave it at that. Gameplay matters most. Take Battlefront, the best looking game on next gen consoles by a long shot (props to Dice for their efforts) but the gameplay and content is still lacking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7U1X6lP9E

Not ported, sounds like they put a lot of effort to cater to the PC gamers. Still not E3 level graphics, but disregarding that it seems like UBI Soft doing it right for PC players.

"Tone_E wrote:

I understand the devkit and the fact it was running on a pc for the demo, but not many people do. There's tons of reddit posts where Xbox and PS4 displays at shows (CES, Gamescon, etc) crash to desktop and people are like "omg it was running on a pc" etc.

It's not your job to be indignant on their behalf. Be smarter than them, and manage your own expectations.

However, what they did, by way of advertising and insinuation suggests the level of quality shown is representative of what people can expect for the final product on next gen consoles.

Shady in my opinion, but lets leave it at that.

I agree it's shady, but is it more shady or less shady than all the CG in the FF7R trailers? The actual game will not unfold like the CG scenes, even though the CG scenes will still be included in the game, at least purportedly.

"Tone_E wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7U1X6lP9E

Not ported, sounds like they put a lot of effort to cater to the PC gamers. Still not E3 level graphics, but disregarding that it seems like UBI Soft doing it right for PC players.

Yea, I read an interview with the Dev that really makes it seem like the PC version will be significantly better than the console version (graphically).

"Desides wrote:

It's not your job to be indignant on their behalf. Be smarter than them, and manage your own expectations.

I agree it's shady, but is it more shady or less shady than all the CG in the FF7R trailers? The actual game will not unfold like the CG scenes, even though the CG scenes will still be included in the game, at least purportedly.

First of all I'm not surprised by the entire fact that it's happening. Secondly, there's something inherently wrong with what you said. Consumers shouldn't have to manage their expectations, as we've had to so many times in the past. Yeah, I get it, the whole fool me once thing. In my opinion companies should be held liable to false claims, not the consumer for believing them. Lastly, I'm more indignant of the widely accepted principle dev companies employ without consequence more than the shortcomings of the game itself, which I really couldn't care less for either way. If it turns out to be good I'll likely pick it up, if not I won't. It piqued my interest, that's all.

Regarding FF, I doubt they're ever portrayed as "in game footage" but I don't follow the series enough to know. False claims happened with Watchdogs, Destiny, The Division, and almost assuredly will happen with Ghost Recon Wildlands. Did you see those trailers? No way it launches with those graphics either. Que sera sera.

"Tone_E wrote:

Secondly, there's something inherently wrong with what you said. Consumers shouldn't have to manage their expectations, as we've had to so many times in the past.

Consumers should always be wary of being fed bull**** by a repeat offender of bull**** feeding. Remember Watch Dogs? It is absolutely the consumer's responsibility to be informed.

Regarding FF, I doubt they're ever portrayed as "in game footage" but I don't follow the series enough to know.

FF7's PSX release had a relatively high return rate because people thought the CG scenes in the commercials were representative of normal in-game graphics.

"Desides wrote:

Consumers should always be wary of being fed bull**** by a repeat offender of bull**** feeding. Remember Watch Dogs? It is absolutely the consumer's responsibility to be informed.

FF7's PSX release had a relatively high return rate because people thought the CG scenes in the commercials were representative of normal in-game graphics.

Caveat emptor right? Except in this case the company is taking money prior to releasing the final product based on demos shown and depictions of a product that are not representative of the final product - graphics and otherwise. Should the game be released already, the buyer beware line of thinking has merit. In this case I don't think it does, and I don't think it is the responsibility of the consumer to determine if a company is going to live up to their promises. Watchdogs? What if I'm a 16 year old who just got $100 from grandma for my birthday and I don't know any better re: Watchdogs? Is it even relevant to bring up the past to justify that although UBI Soft is in the wrong we should've known better?

I get what you're saying, no one is forcing you to pre-purchase the game, do reading on the developer before paying in advance for a game, etc etc, companies in all industries in general are guilty of this with the new crowd funding culture, etc etc. You can return the game, etc etc. That's the problem. There are too many exit vehicles for these companies and they aren't held accountable whatsoever. What happened to Gearbox with that Alien debacle? Nothing. Shame really.

"Tone_E wrote:

Caveat emptor right? Except in this case the company is taking money prior to releasing the final product based on demos shown and depictions of a product that are not representative of the final product - graphics and otherwise. Should the game be released already, the buyer beware line of thinking has merit. In this case I don't think it does, and I don't think it is the responsibility of the consumer to determine if a company is going to live up to their promises. Watchdogs? What if I'm a 16 year old who just got $100 from grandma for my birthday and I don't know any better re: Watchdogs? Is it even relevant to bring up the past to justify that although UBI Soft is in the wrong we should've known better?

I get what you're saying, no one is forcing you to pre-purchase the game, do reading on the developer before paying in advance for a game, etc etc, companies in all industries in general are guilty of this with the new crowd funding culture, etc etc. You can return the game, etc etc. That's the problem. There are too many exit vehicles for these companies and they aren't held accountable whatsoever. What happened to Gearbox with that Alien debacle? Nothing. Shame really.

Where is your money "taken" by the company prior to release of the final product? I guess just on Uplay in this instance, but do they even charge right away? (I legitimately do not know)

"Tone_E wrote:

I get what you're saying, no one is forcing you to pre-purchase the game, do reading on the developer before paying in advance for a game, etc etc, companies in all industries in general are guilty of this with the new crowd funding culture, etc etc. You can return the game, etc etc. That's the problem. There are too many exit vehicles for these companies and they aren't held accountable whatsoever. What happened to Gearbox with that Alien debacle? Nothing. Shame really.

I'm saying Ubisoft in specific should be considered a liar, based on past practices, until otherwise proven. Your reaction a Ubisoft E3 presentation should be the same as my reaction to reading The New York Times: "Wow, what if THAT'S true?"

I've been messing around with the beta today and I gotta say I really enjoy it. The NYC setting and weather effects are amazing. I think it looks fine visually; I play on consoles so I probably don't see the kind of detailed stuff you guys do :lol:

The HUD and UI is kind of overwhelming though. The HUD can be turned off however. The UI will just need to be getting used to I suppose.

As far as the gameplay is concerned, it feels solid. The cover system is simple, but effective to navigate. PvP is chaotic around extraction points in the Dark Zone but it's still fun. There's supposed to be a decent amount of single player stuff as well (the beta had a couple of SP missions). My biggest takeaway is that there really isn't anything like this. The cover shooter/RPG located in ravaged NYC. It's so cool.

Spent 4-5 hours playing the beta on PC.

+ The graphical options are extensive and scale well.
+ It's a blast in a group. I played with my ArmA buddies and we did very well by implementing our squad tactics.
+ Relatively bug-free from what I've seen.
+ Good merger of a stat-based RPG with the action genre. This is like a more fluid Fallout.
- The UI is confusing and poorly laid out, and focuses on being more fake high tech than useful.
- Gunplay is weird, nothing feels very solid.
- No crouch or stance changes, just upright movement and cover sticking.
- Beta is limited; once you go through the restricted area and see everything, you're done, all that's left is the Dark Zone.
- Hipsters are nowhere to be seen so they can't be shot, enemies are generic dudes in hats and hoodies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80ShWk_Aro&list=PLs1-UdHIwbo7mjFgENw_iMIcFccloZls1

So we are obviously going to need a "ThePhins" group...Ill be playing on PC and would guess ill be pretty average at this game ;).

Not sure I'm getting it on launch, but if I do we can squad up for sure.

playing beta seems incredibly smooth and intuitive..few bugs though or at least i think they are bugs..mouse control is a bit buggy sometimes you have to reload game because you cant shoot and in the dark zone you clear out a camp and another instantly respawns..these are not easy solo encounters and its basically an insta gib.

So, player statistics and status are stored client side, uploaded to the server when needed, and the server just trusts whatever is coming from the client. This means that cheating is extremely simple: modify your stats locally, and the server says "oh you can turn invisible, cool."

Ubisoft claims this will be addressed, but doesn't specifically say that they're removing client side statistics.

"Desides wrote:

So, player statistics and status are stored client side, uploaded to the server when needed, and the server just trusts whatever is coming from the client. This means that cheating is extremely simple: modify your stats locally, and the server says "oh you can turn invisible, cool."

Ubisoft claims this will be addressed, but doesn't specifically say that they're removing client side statistics.

How is UBI Soft's anti cheat in other MP titles, I don't own one? Punkbuster? It can't be that simple to cheat.....can it?