Well first, understand that the half-finished game you have now will not get much better on the system it is currently on. In fact, I wouldn't even say it's half-finished. Half is way too generous. Player match sizes are supposed to be several times the size they are now. Gameplay types are supposed to be completely different, and there is supposed to be an actual sandbox to play in.

So if they continue developing for the PS3, essentially the game will get further and further away from what it is ACTUALLY supposed to be about. And the longer it goes down the path, the harder it will be for it to turn away from it because all of the EVE-side mechanics will become dependent on certain systems.

Why would it look worse on PS4?

The majority of the physics problems come from the inconsistent frame rate giving server errors. Like when you hit an acorn in the middle of the road and your LAV spazzes out -- that's from frame rate issues, believe it or not. It's a common 3d physics issue with bad graphic cards/low powered system.

CCP has already done a lot of work on future-related graphical effects, and have everything from unreal 4 at their disposal. The only reason the game looks bad to begin with is because all of their art assets are either disabled or scaled down to meet the PS3's requirements. When they are at their full glory, the game looks great. But you never get to see that outside of screenshots.

A lot of the aiming problems also come from the bad frame rate -- which again, would be solved on the PS4. The input delay should be gone as well. If they were to port it over to PS4 now, crank up the frame rate, crank up the texture quality, most of the problems would fix itself.

Most "core" problems this game has is immediately solved on a more stable system. In fact, most of the balance issues are a lot more tolerable when you can actually aim due to a cirsp frame rate. Being able to function makes the game actually fun.

No, you already can't read yourself. It would look just as good compared to other titles once they uncap the graphical mojo and let loose the pretty textures and effects. Do you have any idea what a simple upgrade to hardware can do to a games appearance? It can easily look just as good as Killzone once the proper filters, textures, and effects are put in place. And since it receives constant updates, it will probably end up looking better. If you have any experience with modding whatsoever you should already realize that.

And if we are comparing game mechanics to something like PS2, let me tell you right now that PS2 has less variety than Dust does in general. Most weapons behave exactly the same as their counterparts, they just happen to hit harder. There are fewer "suits" to choose from as well. So what exactly is appealing there? Right now, about the only thing PS2 has over dust is player count (which would be solved on PS4) and better aerial vehicles.

Oh, and you know why we can't get better aerial vehicles right now for Dust? The maps are too small to support them. Know why? Low player count. Why is the player count low? Cause PS3 can't handle the damn game.

It always comes back to that.

Stop.

I just explained that frame rate effects the gameplay via the physics, ability to aim and input delay, and that this would be fixed on PS4 due to the additional processing power. Hell, it would also effect render distance. That was a gameplay oriented argument.

When I was talking about player count, I was not referring to the number of people logged into the game at once, I was talking about number of players deployed in a single battle. More processing power means more players in the matches themself, and therefore bigger environments. That was the original vision of Dust.

So how does the graphics>gameplay argument ever come into focus as my primary argument? It doesn't. In fact, the only reason its a part of the argument at all is because you said it would look bad compared to other PS4 titles, which it wouldn't for the reasons I already listed.

So your rebuttal is entirely off kilter. You're saying things, but they don't match the context.

You understand that both the PS3 and PS4 can maintain their own client simultaneously, right? They've done this before with EVE -- used two completely different clients to both access the same game world. A classic and a premium client. It can be done, as long as certain game-altering effects are disabled to accommodate the PS3 users in "classic" game modes.

And most certainly, PS3 users would probably be barred from the larger player-count style matches, but seriously WHO CARES. They won't be missing anything they don't already have, and they can always play 16 vs 16 lagtastic skirmish mode on their crappy PS3. Anyone who is serious about competition probably falls into the "getting a PS4" demographic.

It all comes down to how the server reads the client data. As long as the clients obey the same rules, everything can work. There is no reason it cannot be done from ps3 to ps4 and act cross-compatible.

For PC matches, you have two routes you can follow. You can either split the type of engagements into large-scale battlefields (PS4 only) and small scale skirmish (PS3 and PS4 shared) which effect different things.

Or, you can simply say "tough luck PS3, have fun with matchmaking". That may sound harsh, but looking at my roster from SyN just about every single person on our A-team was planning on getting a PS4 anyway. There are maybe a couple that are not getting one right away. The early adopters of new hardware are also the same demographic that gets into games very competitively -- after all, they are gaming enthusiasts for a reason. So this doesn't change the PC population much.

Now Takahiro, you are a tanker right? I can tell you from experience that tanking in PC is probably 90% less laggy than actual in-compound fighting on foot. I don't know why it works that way, but it does. Maybe things render differently on foot. Maybe being closer to objects taxes the system more. I don't know, there's probably a lot of reasons. But tanking has always been less laggy from my experience. Numbz and I had the same conversation a long time ago, he would be chilling out doors in his tank feeling great and everyone on foot would be bitching that the game was moving in a slideshow fashion, to the point of unplayability.

I also have a much easier time dealing with this lag when I am forge gunning. Being farther away from the action puts less strain on the system, and I don't really feel it. But the guys down there actually fighting do, and I need only fall from my tower for ten seconds to feel the horrible nature of it all.