Don't Expect Large Scale Battle Royale in Crackdown 3, as Developers Point Out Memory Limitations

Crackdown 3 won't be getting large scale modes for Battle Royale or anything like that, as the developers pointed out memory limitations due to the destruction involved in multiplayer.

[yellowgerbil]

Power of the cloud

[djsilke45]

so much power

[trooper_]

Lmao.

[FallenAngel1984]

Who knew “reach for the sky and touch the clouds” had limits

[RacerX]

A lot of why I went with Xbox over PS was for this game, Crackdown was so much fun.... However, Seems like every time I open a Crackdown 3 article, something else has been removed and more expectations tampered down. I feel like no matter what they release, their player base won't be happy.... Who wants to fully destroy a map with no one else to mess around with?

[WilliamSheridan]

They didn't rule out multiplayer, they just said no battle Royale mode. No 100 player game. Shit people keep overreacting

[RacerX]

@shaggy, I might be remembering wrong, but I'm pretty sure they announced a long while back the fully destructible map with 100 players. They didn't call it "Battle Royale", but pretty sure they announced a massive amount of players.

[rainslacker]

I don't recall them announcing a massive number of players. Its been a while, but they made it seem like the destruction would be more prevalent in the game, and the maps with it would be of I guess a normal MP map size....whatever that may be. But that latter part was probably more just people's own expectations.

They later said that they were going to only do this in the MP parts of the game, while the SP would just be normal game play without the cloud attached. Then they said it would only be in one MP mode of the game. So, we know there's a SP mode, and I imagine there is also other MP mode with bigger maps.

They have never announced a BR mode to my knowledge. Even 100 player count isn't a prerequisite for the genre. Larger, shrinking maps seems to be part of it though....along with death is permanent thing going on.

At least that's what I took from all the talk over the years that I can recall. I didn't follow all the actual stuff about the content of this game though.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Powa of the cloudzzz I'm sorry but I'm not only one who saw this coming. It's just the cloud rn nothing more than a fantasy.

[rainslacker]

Imagine that. When I said long ago that the local machine would still impose limits on what was possible....I was actually right.

But, that isn't the whole picture, and I'm not going to pat myself on the back because I was right about local hardware still being a limiting factor because BR can be done on the console now, so this sounds more like they just aren't making a BR mode, and using this as an excuse. If you can draw the world on the system, then you can run it in a BR mode. There is nothing so amazing about what I've seen in CD3 that wouldn't allow a BR mode. BR mode is just another form of multi-player, with bigger maps. But the bigger map part isn't really a pre-requisite.

On the memory issue, there are games out there that do more with what's in the systems than you see in the current BR offerings, so this is really just a cop-out.

However, given the delays of the game, and the final look of the game based off the more recent game play showings, they should probably not bother focusing on a BR mode for the time being.

[81BX]

I'm not going to pay myself on the back? For what? Stating the obvious? Every technology has limitations until made better. Board walk fortune teller here /s

[rainslacker]

No. There's just some people around here who act like I'm always wrong, and even when you state the obvious, they won't believe it, or accept it.

The other person replying to you being an example. If you actually look at what I said about CD3, you'd see I was one of the few who said it was possible back when it was first talked about, but urged people to maintain a bit of balance in their expectations.

Cloud can do the asynchronous compute, but with the current tech available, what the local client(X1) could actually display was going to be limited. That got me a lot of disagrees back in the day.

Oh....and @ Obscure.

Don't bother huh? So, gonna give me credit for being right that the local client was going to limit what would come? Or was I wrong about that too?

[81BX]

@Rainslacker
Ok. Love u

[Obscure_Observer]

@rainslacker

"I was right about local hardware still being a limiting factor because BR can be done on the console now, so this sounds more like they just aren't making a BR mode, and using this as an excuse."

Excuse? BR mode was NEVER supposed to be featured on Crackdown 3 anyway, so i´m not sure what you´re trying to imply here, other than "patch yourself on the back" maybe?

[rainslacker]

Never said it was supposed to have BR mode. I know reading comprehension can be difficult for you, and it would explain why you always think I'm wrong about stuff, but I'm saying that I was right about the local client is still going to be limited in what it can handle on screen, regardless of what is processed in the cloud. This may change whenever they start doing off asynchronous graphics processing, but for what's being done here, you aren't going to get any better visuals or larger worlds because of the cloud.

Something I know you most certainly argued with me about back when this stuff was first going around.

In this case, they're talking about memory limitations being the reason, but there is no reason that a BR mode can't be offered through this game because the memory isn't the problem with the current gen systems.

@Gangsta

Sure gangsta. Except I'm usually more right than wrong. I'm wrong about policies or potential policies and how they'll play out, and sometimes wrong about how certain topics may affect the industry or the consumers buying habits....usually when I base it on heightened emotions. I'm almost never wrong about tech.

"Any examples of other BR games that have full destruction on consoles?"

Full destruction affects the memory in the scene how? More variables? It doesn't take that much memory to hold hundreds of thousands of variables that would be used in this game. The size of the world you play in is affected how by the full destruction? What is drawn on screen is what gets drawn on screen. It can be limited by memory, but we've seen more drawn on screen than we've seen with the recent CD3 game play. What do you see in CD3 that can't be placed into a BR scenario? Maybe the world can't be as big, but like Obscure, you miss the point.

The point is, there is a limit on what the local consoles can display or do at one time, regardless of how it manages to process some kinds of data to make that world do things. What's drawn on the screen is done locally, and the physics behind making the objects on the screen have nothing to do with the size of the world when they're processed off site.

You're equating something that isn't related to world size as the reason it isn't happening, and this dev is talking about memory limitations.

You guys sure seem to like to argue with me on this, despite what I'm actually saying is the X1 is actually capable of doing more than what they're offering in CD3. Much more actually....at least graphically and in terms of world size.

In short....there is no reason I can think of, or at least none related to memory, that this game couldn't work in a BR mode. It may not be on the same scale as other entries in the genre, but if it can't be done, it isn't because of memory limitations. The current systems are able to draw and move around much more than I saw being destroyed in CD3. What the local systems can't do....allegedly, is process that information in a manner to draw it when it's needed, but the cloud should take care of that.

"And no one disputed that the local machines wouldn't have limits"

LOL. HAHAHAHAHA. Wow. Maybe not with you, but I certainly had plenty of conversations with people who were disagreeing with me. I remember quite well. Maybe they didn't with you personally, but that may have been because you never actually discussed the topic. That was back in a time when you weren't acting like a raging fan boy all the time, and were more sensible.

Hope I cleared things up for you two, I'm sure you won't bother to try and understand.

[Obscure_Observer]

@rainslacker

"Something I know you most certainly argued with me about back when this stuff was first going around. "

I think you´re trying make something out of nothing. What you´re saying about limited hardware is common knowloged and NOBODY said otherwise!

Microsoft never said the Cloud would enhance memory or graphics! Its supposed to enhance PROCESSING POWER!

[rainslacker]

That is some serious revisionist history you got going on right there.

But if you say so. It won't be the first time that something i said in the past that some people vehemently disagreed with me on, had those same people then say they never said that, and it suddenly becomes a talking point for their side as if they were always the rational ones.

[gangsta_red]

When people constantly throw shade on a company and their products 24/7, one of those is bound to be true, not really sure if that's something to be proud of or wanting to pat oneself on the back for.

And no one disputed that the local machines wouldn't have limits or that Crackdown BR would be some history changing event.

"...there are games out there that do more with what's in the systems than you see in the current BR offerings, so this is really just a cop-out."

Any examples of other BR games that have full destruction on consoles?

[AngelicIceDiamond]

Tbh I don't remotely remembering them announcing a BR mode anyway. It was all fan speculation and nothing from the devs themselves said anything about it so I dunno why ppl are doing the usual trolling. Finding any desperate excuse just to hate. Toxic gaming community.

[gangsta_red]

@Angelic
This is actually true, I also don't remember MS saying that Crackdown would have any traditional BR feature.

I do remember discussing that it would be cool, but there was nothing official about a BR mode for Crackdown anyways.

[phoenixwing]

This would be a prime time to troll xbox fans but I will say the technology is in its infancy and the problems of today may change to gains tomorrow. However msoft should not have banked so hard on this technology if they were only going to work on it for one game and technically 2 for the water physics in sea of thieves

[crazyCoconuts]

I agree, it's certainly good to see them experimenting with different approaches. MS over sold it to combat the power difference in the base consoles, and that warrants criticism but hats off to them for implementing a proof of concept eventually...

[rainslacker]

Eh. they'll get trolled regardless. Personally, I find the tech interesting.

I think what MS showed in the game play videos showed promise, because it proves asynchronous computing works. Its a good proof of concept, regardless of how the game plays or handles the object data itself. There's a difference between something working(which cloud compute apparently does), and the way the developer utilizes that technology with the resources available to them.

The tech shown was impressive. The implementation in game, not so much.

[Germaximus]

I wasn't planning to play Crackdown 3 for a battle royale mode anyways.

[Smokehouse]

“Don’t expect battle royale”
What is this, 2017?

[EmperorDalek]

It would've been perfect for it honestly.

[badz149]

LOL

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Looks much improved based on new trailer and gameplay footage. Hope it works out.

[IRetrouk]

Who was expecting a br mode though? They have been pretty clear recently with what the game is coming with.

[kuuhaku749]

wait battle royale with 5 vs 5 only?

[MadLad]

It's articles like this that expose the mature, and immature, of this site.

[Sgt_Slaughter]

What did you expect from a game made in 2013/2014? It's pretty limited.

[Italiano1234567]

Its 5v5 man

[Ristul]

I remember when ms talked about The power of The cloud at e3 2013. I knew right then and there that it was bs.

[Platformgamer]

don't worry, i expect nothing at all.
i'll play it for 10$ when also ori 2 will be on gamepass and then we'll see if it is good or not

[THC CELL]

Flop, next game please

[Obscure_Observer]

@THC CELL

"Flop, next game please"

Flop? Some fanboys say that PS4 has triple userbase compared to Xbox One. We shall see if Days Gone will sell 3x more copies than Crackdown 3 on Xbox One.

Time will tell. ;)

[THC CELL]

Pff new ips are a hard sell let's see what last of us 2 says

[Obscure_Observer]

@THC CELL

"Pff new ips are a hard sell"

You mean, like Horizon: Zero Dawn? Nice try, good to se see that you already have your lame excuses in place.

[AngelicIceDiamond]

@The Cell or you can try minding your buissness. Quit being annoying and toxic, be apart of the solution not the problem.

[PhoenixUp]

Looks like Microsoft took the phrase “the sky(cloud) is the limit” literally

[AngelicIceDiamond]

Considering BR was never announced for CD3?

[TargusX]

Not every game has to have Battle Royal! It becomes stale if you over do these things!

[EmperorDalek]

This could've been a fairly unique take on it, if it used a fully destructable city.

[rainslacker]

True. but I don't think BR has been around long enough, or been implemented into enough games yet, to be considered stale.

However, if the dev doesn't want to implement it, then they don't have to. I'm not going to say they have to, nor get mad at them for deciding not to.

I recall there used to be some people saying that horde mode should be a standard MP mode last gen.

Regardless, I think people decided that BR was past its prime a lot sooner than was prudent. Eventually, it'll just be another mode in a lot of games. Much like Horde is now.

[Shikoku]

"A rule of thumb we like to use is that [for] every Xbox One available in your living room we’ll have three of those devices in the cloud available,"

"things like physics modeling, fluid dynamics, and cloth motion were all prime examples of effects that require a lot of up-front computation that could be handled in the cloud without adding any lag to the actual gameplay." - Matt Booty Arstechnic 2013

"The cloud will provide Xbox One developers with the CPU and storage equivalent of three extra consoles."

"Henshaw said it was telling developers to assume that they would have roughly three times the resources immediately available to their game in the cloud."

“40 times greater than the Xbox 360 in terms of processing capabilities using the cloud."-Jeff Henshaw MCVUK 2013

So here we are 5yrs later and they say memory issues will hold crackdown back gee you think? Power of the cloud......ha!!

[spicelicka]

Cloud doesn't mean unlimited, you expect it to have infinite number of players and unlimited destruction. That's like wow you can't have 100,000 players play at once? Such restrictions!

[Shikoku]

Look above and read the quotes. It clearly doesnt even meet the supposed BS MS was trying to push 5yrs ago. The cloud as a sources for gaming preformance? when devs cant even program for more than 2 cores without getting confused. Its a joke and no one said 100,000 blah blah blah now you're just talk out of your ass and trying to justify the nonsense.

[spicelicka]

I'm not justifying anything, it's no secret that their initial claims were off the mark. But this article and the comments on it seem like a reach and an excuse to troll. Battle Royale was not one of the things promised in Crackdown 3, so you can't just make up restrictions and use it to start a flame war.

[Shikoku]

While pointing to no battle royle is a misdirection it doesnt detract from the flatout lies they were pushing and trying to sell everyone 5yrs ago and saying things like "were off the mark" is an understatement they're not even in the same ballpark.

[l33t_haxx0r]

Zomg cloud

[Christopher]

Didn't expect it to have it. Honestly not interested in MP, just a good SP. I don't think there's anything negative here as they never promised BR, only small number versus and co-op.