Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I thought Dishonored looked a bit like oil painted ass on PS3, but my budget dictates I stick to rentals indefinitely, so I'll live with however this performs.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bioshock Infinite IGN Review In Progress: A.K.A Console Owners Cry
- Thread starter Vire
- Start date
Well thats not the point of it, but the distance certainly masks a lot of the flaws. Me personally am still impressed by console games these days and i play about 5-6 feet away from a 46 incher.
Sitting closer increases my immersion factor ten fold like Pen Fold.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I don't know if you're joking, but I laughed anyway.
I play consoles because I already own them and my PC gets upgrades like I get raises.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Nice title change.
? It's still the same stupid title.
Vire
Member
Enjoy the view from your porcelain chair and PC.
No the thread title sounds almost like the game is broken on consoles, it's not. The PC version just looks and runs better that is all. News at 11?
This whole thing is a non issue, but because a reviewer focused on the negatives of a the console rather than the positives a new PC brings, it has been painted in a very negative way.
Lol no joke intended honestly, can see the appeal of playing on a TV with the PC version but should textures even come up as cons when describing the console versions? Does the consumer who only plays on console really care? You'd think that is second nature to them so they wouldn't notice anyway.
Vire
Member
No one said it's broken, just disappointing. Especially when it's the focus of the entire article.
He said that Infinite doesn't have the same wow factor that Bioshock 1 did on consoles. I'm sure he's using the standard of it being compared to OTHER console games, not the PC version. It sounds like he may even think Bioshock 1 has better textures/performance.
Doesn't have much to do with PC at all.
I think UE3 just has issues that were never fixed. I remember being really impressed with BioShock's visuals on 360 and then being amazed at how many texture loading problems Mass Effect had a few months later.
The pace of this game seems a lot faster with the zip lines and such, so I'm guessing everything that sucks about UE3 is more apparent. I hope UE4 has a lot less deficiencies since it is probably destined to be as widely used.
ArisenDragon
Member
Why is everyone saying this is coming out for PS4, I doubt it highly.
Because when all the new releases underperform they'll inevitably get ported to the new consoles, since hopefully people will actually start buying games again at that point.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
i bet the ps3 move controls will be awesome. maybe ill DD too.
Poimandres
Member
I think it's pretty unrealistic to expect perfect performance from console games these days.
This game was a major factor in me investing in a new gaming PC about 6 months ago. I can't wait for this game!
This game was a major factor in me investing in a new gaming PC about 6 months ago. I can't wait for this game!
89%...but yeh, it will probably unlock by the time it releases.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
I'll be playing this on PC because of free code, so I hope it looks mighty purdy.
I'm sure it will, but if not I would be pretty disappointed. TBH I didn't realize it was something that wasn't "unlocked yet". I've been wanting to play XCOM for a while now, seems like it got a lot of positive feed back around here.
Well, there was never pefect performance to begin with in terms of third parties using UE3. But I don't find the expectation that developers should have a better handle on static hardware now than six years ago to be unreasonable.
It isn't like they are taking a UE4 game and trying to shoehorn it onto current gen systems.
Square Triangle
Member
I don't Really care, as long as its gameplay is solid I'll be fine.
It is running on the Unreal 3 right, how can it look so bad for such an old engine?
It is running on the Unreal 3 right, how can it look so bad for such an old engine?
Raitosaito
Member
Well to some people anything running at 25fps or lower is broken
And you would be right
Poimandres
Member
But it's all a matter of trade offs. With this game, it seems like they would need to downgrade the lighting or perhaps make the areas smaller, or reduce the draw distance. Well, we don't really know what the cause is at the moment. It could be that the game is "poorly optimized" or it could be that the game is a little ambitious for these old consoles.
Considering this type of thing has been happening more often with major releases, and that the original Bioshock ran fine on the same hardware when it released, I think it's more likely a matter of ambition rather than incompetence.
Well to some people anything running at 25fps or lower is broken
It is. There is no excuse for a console game to run below a locked 30fps.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
91%, hell it might unlock tommorow.
Its a great game. Unfortunately I cannot take advantage of this deal as I didnt preorder on steam, but I got it for much less than it retails for here in Australia. ($40aud as opposed to $80-90aud steam price), so I cant complain too much
Poimandres
Member
I think you will find there are plenty of excuses.
It's not such an easy matter. If a game looks good and runs smoothly 95% of the time, I'm not going to get up in arms about the odd frame rate drop. It's the way things have always been.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
Very few games on current consoles have that. Now that some years have passed I'm not wowed at anything I see in Bioshock anymore.
The first time I played Bioshock I just stared at the screen during the opening because I thought the water looked too good to be gameplay.
BlackGoku03
Member
All of them were best on PC, right? This should come at no surprise although I was expecting a shitty version for the PS3 not the 360.
Perhaps I was a bit overstated, but the snippet says "regular" frame rate drops.
Meh, game reviewers said Spec Ops: The Line had shitty graphics, because they played it on consoles. When in reality it has some of the best art direction the engine has ever been used to produce.
Long story short: They have no fucking idea what they're talking about.
Bioshock 1 is one of the worst PC ports ever made, but still better than consoles.
Why do you say that ? I thought it was excellent once they patched in the FOV adjuster
Its nowhere near the worst. Saints Row 2 and GTA4 are far, far worse
Mouse doesn't even work properly to this day, have to do a work-around fix for Mouse Acceleration.
Let's not forget this game has one of the largest DRM controversies of all time.
I originally bought it for PC at release, and then decided to re-buy it on 360 instead a short bit later. It was a dark time for PC gaming... late 2007. Between that, Hellgate: London, and Crysis making everyone realize their computer sucked ass.
RobotMafia
Banned
Kinda already figured the consoles would lag behind but my PC sucks so Ill just go PS3. Ill probably also just wait a few weeks before even getting it.
ThatStupidLion
Member
sooo you're telling me i don't have to follow the rest of the review IGN?
I dont get this reviews in progress.
I dont get this reviews in progress.
I actually find both frustrating, but the reasons are quiet different: PC can be a very powerful platform, and so it'd be good to port a game over that not only runs reliably but can really take advantage of that power: much more money WAS sunk into that PC than a console after.
In contrast, the problem for consoles is kind of in reverse: the system has set limits that will not and can not budge. Develop by those, don't try to reach for more only to make the game run and look like crap despite technically pushing way more, not unless you have ambitious game design like Shadow of the Colossus or a GTA last gen did.
But at least that's "fixable" by getting a decent PC relative to the game's launch. If the console version also runs like crap or sub optimally you're just screwed.
I hope you mean this generation (unless I'm missing something), because in the long history of PC releases it wouldn't even register on the top 10, maybe not top 20. Hell, I'd argue games like SR2 and the games that lock at 30 FPS and even a relatively low resolution rank higher, Bioshock's issue far as I could tell was mainly with the ragdoll physics, and that was a problem on consoles if you turned 60 FPS on.
Fried Food
Banned
This actually disappointed me.
I'm like whatevs when it comes to the textures, but I was hoping for a solid 25-30 range framerate.
I'm hoping he is making a bigger deal out of it for hits, and he probably is.
I'm like whatevs when it comes to the textures, but I was hoping for a solid 25-30 range framerate.
I'm hoping he is making a bigger deal out of it for hits, and he probably is.
BlackGoku03
Member
I remember playing a little bit of it on a friend's alienware and it looked and ran great. But that was well after it came out.
Jacksonlee
Member
pfffffft
i play games for story, not graphics.
i play games for story, not graphics.
valentine71
Banned
No mandatory install at all. I jumped straight to the main menu.
ArisenDragon
Member
I suppose that's good. Let us know how it runs too.
Inferno313
Banned
He says they're "slight" so hopefully that means no more than 25.