Middle-Earth: Shadow of War Xbox One X Version Took Less Than 1 Day,Lack of Switch Version Explained

Like many third party titles, Monolith Productions' Middle-Earth: Shadow of War will not be coming to the Nintendo Switch.

Read Full Story >>

The story is too old to be commented.
Bigpappy2094d ago

So what this is saying to me, is that developers can accomplish even more with the X. But the like the fact that porting 4K games to it take very little effort.
Support should be a no brainier for most developers then.

thekhurg2094d ago

It's also clear that the majority of games will simply be this "less than one day" ports too. That's the problem with mid generation upgrades. Developers don't give a crap about them because it's too much work to optimize properly. So they just shit out whatever they can with higher resolution and leave it at that.

gamer78042094d ago

That's not correct in this case. If future devs develop with 4k textures as most will start doing then you not only get resolution increase but higher texture quality.

Ulf2094d ago

Any game that is cross-platform with PC will have built-in upgradable options. All they need to do is tune up the settings for Xbox One X to match that of a "high"-end (not ultra) PC, rather than a "middle" powered one, like the Xbox One S.

The Sony versions don't share so much code with the PC (DirectX, Windows), so they won't be as quick to tune the PS4 Pro version, but it should be decently fast, nonetheless. Like "2 days" rather than "less than 1" -- still pretty trivial.

LastCenturyRob2094d ago

That's what they have been doing with PC for years

NatFanBoyRestricted2094d ago

Poor PRO. Guess PSVR isn't all that on it too.

Kiwi662094d ago

Except its not too much work when it comes to the xb x though as has been stated by numerous devs

Condemnedman2093d ago

desperation jealous deluded salty make a sentence thekhurg

segamaniaco2093d ago (Edited 2093d ago )

Mordor on PRO has the option for 4k or 60fps

Like many games, knack, nioh etc

And mordor supersamples too

AAWELLS092093d ago

Now that's some good spin there. I don't care who you are that's some quality spin. Well done.

TheUndertaker852093d ago

@Ulf: Even first party developers admit it takes closer to a month.

So trivial it takes over ten times more.

DigitalRaptor2093d ago

@ TheUndertaker85

First-party devs have stated how long they spend on it in total, not how long it takes to get it up and running on a PS4 Pro devkit. The Middle-earth: Shadow of War director said that it took a day to get "up and running". Not completed, optimised or ready to ship. At least be honest with people.

TheUndertaker852092d ago (Edited 2092d ago )

@DigitalRaptor: Who's really being dishonest now?

Both first party studios who have worked with PS4 Pro.

"There seems to be two narratives circling around the game development community surrounding the PlayStation 4 Pro. Some developers have spoken out against it, claiming it's essentially like creating two separate versions, and that this is both time consuming and expensive. The other says it's not that circumstantial, and that you may easily churn out a PS4 Pro version in a few months with just a few dedicated staff members on the job."

In a few months being the pro, not the con. From a first party studio defending the PS4 Pro development time & cost.

Based off the quote it is not "how long they spend on it in total" as the topic was putting out a PS4 Pro version specifically, NOT what they spend creating an entire game.

Here we can find a comment by the Killing Floor 2 developers stating going to Pro took around 8% of their time and at least a month.
"“Yes it was more work [to program for PS4 Pro],” said Dave Elder, senior graphics programmer for the game. “It was about one month out of twelve strictly for PS4 Pro (so 8% ish). Mark Cerny’s number might be more accurate for an engine written exclusively for PS4 (we use Unreal Engine 3, which targets multiple platforms),” he conceded."

Which is actually NOT the case as evidenced by Naughty Dog and Guerrilla Games stating roughly the same amount of time.

DigitalRaptor2092d ago (Edited 2092d ago )

"Based off the quote it is not "how long they spend on it in total" as the topic was putting out a PS4 Pro version specifically, NOT what they spend creating an entire game."

What the hell are you talking about? Who's said that it's the amount of time they spent creating the whole game? Both Naughty Dog, Guerrilla Games and whoever else you quote are talking about total time spent on that version until it's ready to go. There's no indication ANYWHERE in any of these interviews that it take months to simply get the PS4 Pro version up and running on a consistent basis.

And so yes, you are the dishonest one by trying to compare a total amount of time to deliver a shipped version of a PS4 Pro game, to a developer of Shadow of War who said that it took less than a day to get an XB1X build "up and running", non-optimised, non-complete, and not ready to ship.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 2092d ago
BigWan782094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )


If PS4 owners would stop hating for a sec and pay attention.. they would realize that the Xbox One X dev kit benefits PS4/PRO as well...

Xbox One X is THE BEST dev kit in the market.
Its a better dev kit for PS4/Pro than the Playstation devs kits are.

Scorpio dev kits, has every engine, middleware, tool kit etc pre-pre-programmed in the One X dev kit.

Phil Spencer event went on record sayin if devs want to do straight ports between Xbox and Playstation without putting much work in.. the devs kit does that too...

Gamers should rejoice that one of the BEST software/tech companies on Earth even bothered to take on such a feat...

Tell me any other gaming company that can compete on this tyoe of level

BeOpenMinded2093d ago

That thought has crossed my mind. This will only push devs to upgrade versions and support better gaming experiences. Regardless of what system you own, if one company supports 4k assets you best believe it will be on the other platform too instead of just random 'boost' on certain titles. There will be pressure to give an equivalent on quality

TheUndertaker852093d ago

@BeOpenMinded: So you want parity.

PS4 Pro is not equal to Xbox One X pure and simple.

4Sh0w2094d ago


Well looks like devs ARE giving a crap about making improvements for X1X, perhaps because like he said it's so easy.

KingKionic 2094d ago

A day for the X.

Talk about accessibility.

The X is a productivity beast.

yeahright22094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

What happened to it being the main platform for devs to focus on?

This is like I've been saying, devs are going to shoot first for where the majority of where their sales will come from. And that will be the X1S and base PS4

LOGICWINS2094d ago

Not necessarily true in every scenario. Battlefield 1 for example was created with the PC in mind, THEN ported to consoles. State of Decay 2 will be made for the PC first, then ported to the One X.

slasaru012094d ago

and the guys below mentioning that PCs got the best versions of Battlefield. Difference is top PC gamers play with PCs conglomerate. Xbox One X owners would be playing with X1/PS4 owners and giving them full setting might be a cheat definitely. So devs will downgrade XOX versions for MP compatibility. Otherwise there will be no installbase for XOX

MegamanXXX2094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

Maybe if this was the Xbox two or a new generation of consoles. Unfortunately third party devs will focus on the OG XBOX ONE and PS4 majority of the time.

KingKionic 2094d ago

We heard similar statements from other third party devs. The Xbox One nor Ps4 is any threat to development.

The current dev kits given to all devs were mandated to be easier to develop the quality of higher spec from PC and put it on the Xbox One X.

So far from almost every dev who has spoke on it have song hymns of its ease of use.

MegamanXXX2094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

I think we should wait and see if the One X will sell well first before we come to a conclusion. Wait and see approach

Krysis2094d ago

They still had to develop those assets to begin with, it's misleading because a game that was no developed with 4k assets would not be a 1 day process.

nitus102094d ago

Oh, you mean a high-end gaming PC not a console? 🙂

babadivad2094d ago

I liked this comment because it made me chuckle.

LamerTamer2093d ago (Edited 2093d ago )

Poor Sony, they are now the weaker system and now in the shadow of the BEAST.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2093d ago
Reaper29r2094d ago

Not exactly true, they would already have the necessary assets a lot of times because of the PC version.

Krysis2094d ago

No where in my comment did I say they had to develop them. I said its misleading because if people think all games will take 1 day to port then they are wrong. Not all games have 4k assets waiting around. Obviously PC games would.

TheUndertaker852093d ago

@Krysis: So they don't have to develop 4K assets which wouldn't lead to an increase in time thus one day is accurate?

Further if the assets already exist for certain versions there'd still be zero extra time added to that day.

What's worse is this is not the only developer stating it takes them such minimal time.

SonsOf Zadok2094d ago

The game (like thr first one) will be on pc which already has 4k assets. So they don't have to develop them again.

sizeofyou2094d ago

But regardless, they still had to be developed.
It's a crap statement!
Actually, it only took a day to build the PC version. We had the assets for the XBX.

yarbie10002094d ago

Mordor would have had 4K assets already because it (like most games) was developed on PC

Allsystemgamer2094d ago

And those assets are developed for PC anyway. The reason it's easy to port is because it's so similar to a pc. They'll already know what the system can handle and they can adjust settings accordingly.

Jman22094d ago

@Krysis most of the time devs do textures and models at a higher resolution than there required regardless of the final out put, then they downscale for the platforms.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2093d ago
zivtheawesome2094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

The fact that the game managed to run at native 4k within a day tells me that they have a forced parity for the base ps4 and base X1 games. Before you downvote hear my reasoning. The power difference between the ps4 and X1 is almost the exact same as the one between 1080p and 900p hence why usually ps4 games run at 1080p and X1 runs at 900p most multiplatform games. Now if a game manages to run at native 4K within a day then that means that raw power is enough without optimisation which means that base X1 version must run at 1080p. If so then going by the assumption that ps4 and X1 share the same graphical effects (could be wrong, which would mean ps4 has better graphical effects, it means that ps4 and X1 have forced parity to each other to 1080p.

JoeDG2094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )


Cmv382094d ago

If you honestly believe what you wrote, not much can help you in this world.

zivtheawesome2094d ago

Then please explain? I just used logic. Why do you think we were told to not expect all multi platform games to be native 4K games on the X1X? Because that most of them were 900p games while first party was 1080p. As 1080p to native 4K is a 4 times increase in resolution means that you need 4 times of power, which means you need 1.3*4 = 5.2 TF. BUT, 900p to 4K needs more power. (3840*2160)/(1600*900) = 5.76 times the resolution increase which means you would need 1.3*5.76 = 7.488 TF for native 4K meaning the X1X is too weak to run native 4K if base xbox runs at 900P, meaning this game runs at 1080p on base Xbox one, means that base Xbox one version and base PS4 version will both be exactly the same. Everything I said is based on numbers and facts.

zb1ftw7772094d ago

Not even slightly true.

The xox is a whole ps4 more powerful than the ps4pro.

Not even close to the tiny difference between 900p and 1080p.

zivtheawesome2094d ago

read my other comment where i spoke with actual numbers before you respond like that...

BrettAwesome2093d ago

It's a little less than 50% more powerful than the ps4pro. The ps4 is 50% more powerful than xbone. You see the similarity? :D

deadhead2093d ago

In house games will run native 4k 30fps or 60. This gen is not a 4k 60 for all games yet.even next gen will be 4k 30

DigitalRaptor2093d ago (Edited 2093d ago )

With checkerboard rendering looking 98% as good as native 4k from a normal viewing distance, the difference is actually about the same. Except the checkerboard 4K output is not a simple dirty upscale like the XB1 did with 900p and less. It's a super sharp hardware-based solution. With more and more third-party devs using checkerboard rendering to attain a 4K output on the XB1X, it's going to be even closer.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2093d ago
conanlifts2094d ago

"The power difference between the ps4 and X1 is almost the exact same as the one between 1080p and 900p hence why usually ps4 games run at 1080p and X1 runs at 900p most multiplatform games"
Just for information from your comment below "Then please explain?"
PS4:- GPU advantage was 40% (roughly), memory was faster, but the same amount.
Xbox One had esram to help with its slower memory, very slightly bridging the gap. Xbox one had a CPU clock speed that was 10% higher than the ps4 (closing the gap slightly).
Xbox S also has a slightly faster GPU over older models increasing to 1.41Tflops from 1.31 Tflops.

X1 on the other hand has 40% more gpu, around 3.5gb more usable game memory (over 60% more) that is also faster, faster hard drive, More cache for both gpu and cpu (doubled over the pro on both GPU and CPU I believe), 10% faster cpu which has also been modified to improve its performance. The efficiency gains and increased Cache are difficult to quantify, but they will make a difference. So the gap is not the same or even nearly as close. The console is the sum of all its parts.

zivtheawesome2094d ago

You are speaking on components that thier direct effect on resolution is minimal and as long as your gpu isnt powerful enough for a certain resolution then the game wouldnt run at that resolution. In the end we know for a fact that most multiplatform games ran at 900p on X1 and 1080 on the PS4. This also makes sense because the ratio of pixels is (1600*900)/(1920*1080) = 0.694 and the ratio of the ps4 power to the X1 is about 1.8/1.3 = 0.72 the difference between the ratios works so devs always choose that. Also i have not said a thing abput CPU because DF already explained that its speed is enough for Native 4K BUT as long as your GPU isnt strong enough for the resolution bump then you cant increase the resolution. All the random facts you shot around doesnt matter. If we check the numbers then we would see that you would need somewhere between the 7.2 to 7.5 TF for a native 4k with all games, which closer to mark cerny's conclusion that you would need 8 in order to play at native 4k.

conanlifts2094d ago

"All the random facts you shot around doesnt matter"

I guess we are going to have to disagree. As i stated a console is the sum of all its parts. Which is why 1st party games likes gears of war 4 are getting both a resolution and asset bump. If you think 60% More memory has no baring on 4k you are mistaken. Where do you think 4k textures are loaded to. Hitting the memory limits directly affects performance. Also increased gpu cache and increased apu efficiency directly improves performance.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2093d ago
StuffAndThings2094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

Next gen I imagine all 3 console makers will have their own portable hand helds that plays the actual console games & not what Sony has been doing with the PSP, Vita

Cmv382094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

Technically not Nintendo either. Since the third party game versions they are getting are gimped at best. Basically what I'm saying, no, that won't happen. You can't get the same power out of a hand held, and well why should you.