I keep seeing this come up again and again, people confused as to why DUST isn't jumping at the PS4. It is a better platform in every way conceivable, except for one. Player count.

Lets just look at some numbers. There are 80 million ps3 owners. If we say 100k play dust or are at least interested enough to have it installed that means that dust is attracting 0.125% of the total market.

If we use the numbers from the poster above me and assume that 5 million PS3 owners will trade in their PS3's for PS4's in the first year we could figure out how many players would even install a PS4 version of dust.

6250.

Even if you are generous and double the ps4 sales numbers, or double the interest they can get in dust you aren't going to have enough players to make it worth their while. Heck do both, and you only get a quarter of the current install base.

So what do you think is the better course of action. Spend 6 months converting to retain the 6k players who will migrate away, or spend 6 months improving the core game, adding features that will attract new players? They are doing the right thing for now.

Am I the only one not buying that line? They would have to be nuts. This hardware can't run the game competently at all and is a massively limiting factor. They would have to have like no pride whatsoever to keep developing on this thing well past the PS4 launch window.

So they are worried about player count then? Are they not aware that being on a console like the PS4 with fewer game choices nets you more players, not less? And being free to play is an even bigger attraction on that front?

I simply don't get the logic. Bad business decision. Bad development decision. Bad everything. It does not make sense.


The only other option is that this is a marketing bluff. But if it's a marketing bluff, why the hell would they make one as detrimental as that? Nobody wants to hear that garbage. Give me a version that can support a consistent frame rate on every map in every situation, that's what I want to hear. I am not stupid enough to believe I will ever see that on this hardware. Nobody else is either.

Some overly cautious nonsense going on right here.

I rather see a test server.

I rather see a test server.

I thought for once CCP got their heads screwed on straight and were planning DUST to be sort of a "HALO killer" if you will by making it the premier game for PS4 release.

Everything seemed primed for that until they released it as final in May. That was the death knell for this game.

Sad really.

If anything, I think the game is more limited by the engine than the hardware.

Am I the only one not buying that line? They would have to be nuts. This hardware can't run the game competently at all and is a massively limiting factor. They would have to have like no pride whatsoever to keep developing on this thing well past the PS4 launch window.

So they are worried about player count then? Are they not aware that being on a console like the PS4 with fewer game choices nets you more players, not less? And being free to play is an even bigger attraction on that front?

I simply don't get the logic. Bad business decision. Bad development decision. Bad everything. It does not make sense.


The only other option is that this is a marketing bluff. But if it's a marketing bluff, why the hell would they make one as detrimental as that? Nobody wants to hear that garbage. Give me a version that can support a consistent frame rate on every map in every situation, that's what I want to hear. I am not stupid enough to believe I will ever see that on this hardware. Nobody else is either.

Some overly cautious nonsense going on right here.

Right now the game isn;t good enough to be ported onto the PS4, maybe in a couple of years when it is more polished they will move it onto the PS4 but right now it's a waste of time as they will be moving the problems from 1 place to another and it is better to fix what they currently have before porting elsewhere

ps3 install base = 90 million
ps4 install base = 0

You realize that all of the assets and graphical effects are dumbed down specifically because its on PS3, right?

You realize that the physics engine suffers due to inconsistent frame rate resulting in wonky behavior with world objects on the client side, which results in errors on the server side, right?

You realize that every single concept they have for this game CANNOT BE DONE on the PS3, because these limitations forcefully limit the area of engagement and player count, right?

It will never be polished on this system. That's a fact.

As Atli said, there are 80 million PS3 owners. Even if the PS4 sells 5 million in its first year, there are still 75 million more gamers on PS3. CCP often say "we will go where our players are" so expect to wait for better PS4 sales before they ANNOUNCE anything. They have already said that they are constantly in talks about Sony about it so of somewhere the wheels are turning but thee majority focus is on PS3 for now.

ps3 install base = 90 million
ps4 install base = 0

So OP what would you want them to do?

Would you want them to port this unfinished half arsed of a game to PS4 to show the next gen on how not to release a game so CCP then makes the PS3 release blunder look like a normal game release?

Frankly porting to PS4 now is a stupid idea right now, it would be a million times worse than the release of the game from beta to retail

Less players because less PS4 out and the game itself is still unfinished

CCP might aswell keep it on PS3, get the features out, get all the racial suits/vehicles and weapons out, sort out FW/PC, introduce the market and get PVE after all that then you can look to the PS4 which by then will hopefully have a fairly big userbase and the game itself will come out more complete

The Unreal engine is one of the most versatile engines around... Here's a list of games that use it.

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.

You already cant read

I said look worse in comparision to other PS4 titles

Plus think about it PS4 playerbase will be small to begin with, it has to compete with at least 3 other F2P games which are already alot more finished than this once and have everything in it at a base level and not including other FPS releases such as KZ4/BF4

DUST doesnt even have the other heavy frames, the scouts/pilotsuits and let alone the vehicles we are missing

Thats just the loadouts, FW still being redesigned same with PC, no PVE at all, markets are not open, EVE link is very very limited at best

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.

So more players in a match with a smaller playerbase

Yea that will work wont it, its not like we have empty rooms as it is and half filled ones

But that doesnt matter because we are still missing PVE/PC/FW2.0/Racial suits and vehicles and weapons/Market/EVE link not too mention the bugs inbetween

While trying to compete with other FPS games

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.

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.

Actually MAG did in minimum mode 64vs64 in max it was 128vs128 in more detailed terain (trees, hills, elevations, levels etc.), Why DUST loosing here with its 16vs16?!
Both games Ps3

I already mentioned this, you simply didn't read it.

Mag can do this because they built their game engine from the ground up to do that. Unreal was never meant to do that, so it can't.

I already mentioned this, you simply didn't read it.

Mag can do this because they built their game engine from the ground up to do that. Unreal was never meant to do that, so it can't.

MAG was a horrible game. Quit using it as a reference point. And PS3 limitations will kill DUST it is almost a decade old tech and the long CCP waits to go to PS4 the more DUST is going to be forgotten about.

So according to some people, the number of people that's gonna be playing PS4 will be too low.

Why didn't you guys tell the makers of PS2 that? Or for that matter, tell DICE / EA, IW /Activision, Ubisoft and all the other big developers / publishers this bit of info.

Clearly they have no idea what they're doing right? I mean, putting out games for a next gen console in the first year?!! BLASPHEMY! SHOCKING!

Having potential low numbers is NO EXCUSE to not get the game on PS4, sorry.

As Atli said, there are 80 million PS3 owners. Even if the PS4 sells 5 million in its first year, there are still 75 million more gamers on PS3. CCP often say "we will go where our players are" so expect to wait for better PS4 sales before they ANNOUNCE anything. They have already said that they are constantly in talks about Sony about it so of somewhere the wheels are turning but thee majority focus is on PS3 for now.

Low count of players on ps4?!
Boyo i dont know, but with ps4 there will be PS2 with up to 2000 players per continent, just compare it wit Dust. I thing there will be more players asap on ps4.

Low count of players on ps4?!
Boyo i dont know, but with ps4 there will be PS2 with up to 2000 players per continent, just compare it wit Dust. I thing there will be more players asap on ps4.

If anything, I think the game is more limited by the engine than the hardware.

Except you forget that there aren't as many games on the PS4, so more people would try out Dust, especially since it's a F2P title.

You also forget that just by going to the PS4 would improve certain aspects of the game, stuff like making more than 32 player matches a possibility, something that Dust sorely needs. Current maps are not in any way meant for 32 players.

I'm not saying Dust necessarily had to be a launch title, but they're not even working on getting it out early/mid 2014 from what they say. They might be able to get it out by late 2014 if they start working on it very soon, if not it's going to be at least 2015 before it's on the PS4, which in my opinion is at least a year late.

they are trying to develop a game type that requires alot of ram.. ps3 only has 1 gb of ram. how the frick do they expect to expand the develop things like render distance and standard shading with that? the answer is they can't.

Except you forget that there aren't as many games on the PS4, so more people would try out Dust, especially since it's a F2P title.

You also forget that just by going to the PS4 would improve certain aspects of the game, stuff like making more than 32 player matches a possibility, something that Dust sorely needs. Current maps are not in any way meant for 32 players.

I'm not saying Dust necessarily had to be a launch title, but they're not even working on getting it out early/mid 2014 from what they say. They might be able to get it out by late 2014 if they start working on it very soon, if not it's going to be at least 2015 before it's on the PS4, which in my opinion is at least a year late.

The problem isn't the PS3. It's bad programming on CCP's part and bad management of the project for the last year.

I rather see a test server.

Versatile doesn't mean best for this specific situation - ever heard the phrase 'Jack of all trades, master of none' ?

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.

Right so the already slow progress they are making on this game will be further slowed by forcing the team to write and debug for two separate consoles???? not to mention the limiting factor will still be the optimizations for the PS3. and yes ports aren't hard but when you have to do them every build with every change having a chance to introduce new bugs in the port it unnecessarily slows down the pace of development.

You realize that all of the assets and graphical effects are dumbed down specifically because its on PS3, right?

You realize that the physics engine suffers due to inconsistent frame rate resulting in wonky behavior with world objects on the client side, which results in errors on the server side, right?

You realize that every single concept they have for this game CANNOT BE DONE on the PS3, because these limitations forcefully limit the area of engagement and player count, right?

It will never be polished on this system. That's a fact.

Working in the business world, the thing that annoys me most about this statement is the use of the hackneyed "laser-focused." Really? You're literally as focused as a laser? So is EVERYONE ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-11/laser-focused-ceos-multiply-with-promises-from-ipads-to-macaroni.html

Folks don't realize the power of the PS3. Hell, PS3s were combined to create a supercomputer at one point.

I keep seeing this come up again and again, people confused as to why DUST isn't jumping at the PS4. It is a better platform in every way conceivable, except for one. Player count.

Lets just look at some numbers. There are 80 million ps3 owners. If we say 100k play dust or are at least interested enough to have it installed that means that dust is attracting 0.125% of the total market.

If we use the numbers from the poster above me and assume that 5 million PS3 owners will trade in their PS3's for PS4's in the first year we could figure out how many players would even install a PS4 version of dust.

6250.

Even if you are generous and double the ps4 sales numbers, or double the interest they can get in dust you aren't going to have enough players to make it worth their while. Heck do both, and you only get a quarter of the current install base.

So what do you think is the better course of action. Spend 6 months converting to retain the 6k players who will migrate away, or spend 6 months improving the core game, adding features that will attract new players? They are doing the right thing for now.

Destiny is the only thing that could be classified in that realm currently. Beta starts early 2014 for people who pre-order too. I'm going to guess that Dust will lose a lot of people when that game releases.

The PS3's RAM is 512mbs (256 for video and 256 for system). The Cell chip has 256MB of completely sharable RAM, the GPU has 256MB of dedicated RAM.

I keep seeing this come up again and again, people confused as to why DUST isn't jumping at the PS4. It is a better platform in every way conceivable, except for one. Player count.

Lets just look at some numbers. There are 80 million ps3 owners. If we say 100k play dust or are at least interested enough to have it installed that means that dust is attracting 0.125% of the total market.

If we use the numbers from the poster above me and assume that 5 million PS3 owners will trade in their PS3's for PS4's in the first year we could figure out how many players would even install a PS4 version of dust.

6250.

Even if you are generous and double the ps4 sales numbers, or double the interest they can get in dust you aren't going to have enough players to make it worth their while. Heck do both, and you only get a quarter of the current install base.

So what do you think is the better course of action. Spend 6 months converting to retain the 6k players who will migrate away, or spend 6 months improving the core game, adding features that will attract new players? They are doing the right thing for now.

The game has only seen tangible developmental progress for around a year now. Your crazy to assume a game like this wont improve over time. Right now its all about optimization. Glitches and performance will work out over time as the developers...... develop it...... (and get better at using the hardware). I mean...... have you looked at GTA5? That game is a technological masterpiece, and if Rockstar can pull it off, so can CCP.

You just think "ohhhhh the game has had at least one problem or another for the last several months so it will never ever improve" but let me tell you, if you were to compare this game to the Pre-e3 build (replication, I think?) then you would understand that the game then, and the game now is vastly improved, and I have no doubt that it will look the same way comparatively six months from now.

Just a little faith people. A little faith, and a little patience and it wall all get better eventually!