What I'd like to know is if that actually was the case?
Maybe we can get some real investigative journalism on the matter.
From Software should have been reached out to about this matter before having their name dragged through the streets.
What's to investigate?
This whole thing is so dumb! There's more to performance than just frame-rate and resolution. Is texture detail the same? Is draw distance and LoDding the same? How about effects systems like particles, shadows, and reflections? And of course there are features that are going to be specific to current gen offerings like spatial audio and ray tracing, what about load times...
I could go on but seriously, why is this even a conversation when its so obvious that the PS4 and PS5 builds are not going to be identical at anything other than a surface level?
FROM most likely won't address this because its silly!
When targeting a particular platform or hardware config its understood that performance is going to fluctuate both above and below the average; meaning that if you cap down to ensure that you never exceed your budget you need to pull everything down such that for a high percentage of time you aren't getting close to maxing out resource utilization.
In simple terms doing that means making cutbacks to the quality of the whole presentation in order not to drop frames in a minority of cases. So, rather than leaving performance on the table for the entire game, they push as close to the "line" as they think results in the best overall experience.
OBVIOUSLY when the running hardware suddenly has way more grunt than the target, the "line" gets crossed rarely or potentially never. So although frame-rate is "perfect", its just a last gen spec game running on current gen hardware. Which is only a win if you consider holding frame-rate perfectly to be the only thing that matters. A belief that is only held by tech-nerds!
