Yeah i wish that to. Dab some of you pc master race players. Serious question though is hacking and cheating a problem on pc version of division. Iv heard other pc games suffer from this and am jus curious.Originally Posted by Plunderage Go to original post
If you read through all the small print theres probably something in there for both consoles that says even though you paid for them, they are still owned by M$ and sony. So any updates are the decision of them and them alone.Originally Posted by Veldaz Go to original post
As im the manufacturer of my PC, im not governed by these rules, if there are a thing.
Yes its a rotten problem, but only if you go in the DZ.Originally Posted by Peppyevilelmo Go to original post
If I had any inclination to do that (which I dont, id rather stick pins in my eyes) id flick on my PS4 version of the game and look at 30FPS.
Read this article, after reading it myself I started to wonder how many people bought game console vs PC and then what % of those people bought season pass and clothe mod add ons.
https://www.cnet.com/news/playing-ga...ng-a-comeback/
For par condicio:Originally Posted by Final_Agent Go to original post
http://www.dualshockers.com/2017/02/...als-announced/
Ubisoft and Massive deem it appropriate to release it the same day now that there's no commercial deal preventing a simultaneous release on all platforms. I think it's a good policy.
Also, since Massive are clearly aware of certification processes and deadlines I'd bet the internal work is adjusted to this and thus the PC platform is optimized until very, very close to the release, on the client side.
Yet despite this it's still faster on PC. Makes you wonder, huh?Originally Posted by komplik Go to original post
Yeah I'll take Sony's and Microsoft's certification processes over Steam's every day, twice on Sunday. Remember a very high profile game not working, or almost not working, at all on PC?Originally Posted by Veldaz Go to original post
Here's a reminder
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/as-.../1100-6431892/
It was an isolated event for a AAA game, but one which consoles have avoided as far as I can tell 100%.
We, my company, develop and run a couple of mobile Apps. Google Play apps get approved in minutes, Apple takes days (up to two weeks) but they've occasionally unearthed problems we hadn't been able to find and which Google never ever does come up with. So there's always benefits in one approach, but there's also downsides. These days we try to release the iPhone Apps first as Apple do EXTRA testing for us for free![]()
That's more of a case of a patch not being ready (genially) for release yet. If a company releases a patch with problems then that's on the companies head. eg: not the platform with the game that gets the patch. While it's a good idea to hold back a patch until problems are ironed out not every patch will have problems either. Meaning it can sometimes be a good idea to get a patch out there quickly. Especially if it's to fix a past patch.Originally Posted by LepantoESP Go to original post
If it's a single player game having the OPTION to update or not is nice to have. Freedom of choice in the matter. If the patch doesn't work out and causes game breaking problems you can always roll back too. So I really don't see the problem here when it comes to consoles. Are they incapable of being able to do that or something? If so Sony and Microsoft need to wake up and add the option to do that.
Gets more complicated with multiplayer (and therefor this game). But any company worth their salt makes sure things are ready before releasing a patch that might be broken or not. Not every company is worth its salt though (I heard about problems with Battlefield 4. On consoles as well as PC at that). Regardless of what the games are played on. Consoles have NOT avoided that either. Regardless of you "100%" claim.