Support NeoGAF

[Ninja Sharingan]

The fact that they couldn't even get the Xbone version to run at 60FPS in Single Player is a problem in itself. This game is just not optimized properly.

Have you seen this game? it is not uncharted or master chief collection or the last of us. Its completely re built and it looks leagues ahead of the original game. (apart from some rain)

 

[plagiarize]

Have you seen this game? it is not uncharted or master chief collection or the last of us. Its completely re built and it looks leagues ahead of the original game. (apart from some rain)

And even though the rain is worse looking, by what I heard it's more technically intensive and less faked now. Still, the faked stuff looked better.

 

[Dictator93]

And even though the rain is worse looking, by what I heard it's more technically intensive and less faked now. Still, the faked stuff looked better.

Does the PC version use more particles there? That was the main problem on xb1 IIRC. I mean, it was coming down as a light drizzle in the remaster instead of in thick torrential sheets.

GPU particles on console probably cannot be too thick in number.

 

[Afro]

Dumb question, but how are Windows Store apps updated? How will I know when this gets a patch, for example?

 

[riflen]

Dumb question, but how are Windows Store apps updated? How will I know when this gets a patch, for example?

Right there on the front of the store page.

 

[Afro]

Right there on the front of the store page.

Thank you.

 

[scitek]

Would someone mind snapping some screens and comparing Medium textures to Highest? I swear I'm not seeing a difference, and I'm wondering if it's just my system.

 

[dmix90]

Would someone mind snapping some screens and comparing Medium textures to Highest? I swear I'm not seeing a difference, and I'm wondering if it's just my system.

Same here. I posted link to my screens on previous page in this thread. Restarted game like it suggests after changing texture setting and i think there is no difference in iq but big difference in performance....

 

[Afro]

Would someone mind snapping some screens and comparing Medium textures to Highest? I swear I'm not seeing a difference, and I'm wondering if it's just my system.

sure, gimme 5 mins.

edit: there's a difference. look at the engraving on the pillar on the right (the swirls). looks 3D on 'highest'. you can see the groove. the cracks too. looks flat on 'medium'.

'Highest' Textures

'Medium' Textures

 

[SliChillax]

Am I missing something? What happened to Vsync? lol

There's only a lock framerate option in the menu, on or off. With the option set to on, game feels like it's running at less than 30fps, with framerate lock off framerate is good but there's too much stuttering and hitching.

Nothing happens, you mean the Game Bar doesn't show up when you press Win + G? Try to run the game in windowed mode then (ALT + ENTER). When the cutscene is over just hit ALT + ENTER and you're in fullscreen mode again.

That works wonderfully.

Btw anyone else having stuttering and hitching during the campaign? Using a 980ti, i7 5820k, 16gb ram and it performs like ass.

 

[Afro]

Btw anyone else having stuttering and hitching during the campaign? Using a 980ti, i7 5820k, 16gb ram and it performs like ass.

PvP is buttery smooth compared to campaign. It's not just you. Game needs a patch or two.

 

[scitek]

Same here. I posted link to my screens on previous page in this thread. Restarted game like it suggests after changing texture setting and i think there is no difference in iq but big difference in performance....

Sorry, I missed your post earlier. Yeah, I'm seeing the same thing, it seems like there's no difference at all that's visible.

sure, gimme 5 mins.

edit: there's a difference. look at the engraving on the pillar on the right. looks 3D on 'highest'. you can see the groove. looks flat on 'medium'.

'Highest' Textures



'Medium' Textures

Thanks. I don't really see it, but that might mean POM is only on with the Highest setting. I'm wondering if things like that and texture filtering are the only real differences between the two.

 

[Carlius]

the difference is minimal but its there between high and medium...but you really need to be looking.
windows dvr is not too bad after all. it works flawlessly with the interface using the xbox button and it doesnt bother the game while recording.

 

[AlStrong]

edit: there's a difference. look at the engraving on the pillar on the right. looks 3D on 'highest'. you can see the groove. looks flat on 'medium'.

The circles? It's just resolution and/or compression. Look at the cracks on the concrete (same pillar).

 

[Dictator93]

sure, gimme 5 mins.

edit: there's a difference. look at the engraving on the pillar on the right. looks 3D on 'highest'. you can see the groove. looks flat on 'medium'.

'Highest' Textures



'Medium' Textures

I mean, if that is 2x 4x the texel density (probably dependent on the texture)... then that is what it would look like I guess.

 

[dmix90]

sure, gimme 5 mins.

edit: there's a difference. look at the engraving on the pillar on the right (the circles). looks 3D on 'highest'. you can see the groove. looks flat on 'medium'.

'Highest' Textures



'Medium' Textures

Ignorance is a bliss
Especially noticeable in 4k. Now i see other muddy textures even on markus model. No way in hell i will notice that on my TV though so i guess medium will do. Still probably will wait for a few patches and hopefully mGPU support.

 

[Spinifex]

Is it just me or are we moved to a universe where either of two things can happen:

A. A DX12 game runs like crap on NV h/w but is completely fine on AMD's - this is how things are meant to be, NV is doomed, all hail AMD.

B. A DX12 game runs like crap on AMD h/w but is completely fine on NV's - this is a disaster, what's the poing of DX12, it's such a poison, let's hope that and AMD's GE title will make things proper into variant A.

What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? DX12 despite being fully commercially available for what, nearly 12 months now, is still yet to see ANYTHING that indicates whether it is a net positive for games and gamers. There's a lot of hype pushed from both AMD and nVidia, but it's just not bearing fruit at all atm.

I don't have any issues with the game running on my 980Ti.

I should hope not? Why is this something that people proclaim with such smug satisfaction? You shouldn't have any issues with this on a 8800GTS. It looks minimally improved over the original.

 

[dr_rus]

What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? DX12 despite being fully commercially available for what, nearly 12 months now, is still yet to see ANYTHING that indicates whether it is a net positive for games and gamers. There's a lot of hype pushed from both AMD and nVidia, but it's just not bearing fruit at all atm.

I'm talking about the general feeling that because this game is running bad on AMD "DX12 is doomed" while the fact that it's running more or less fine on NV is completely ignored for some reason.

I should hope not? Why is this something that people proclaim with such smug satisfaction? You shouldn't have any issues with this on a 8800GTS. It looks minimally improved over the original.

Seriously?

Original:

"Minimally improved":

 

[Carlius]

I should hope not? Why is this something that people proclaim with such smug satisfaction? You shouldn't have any issues with this on a 8800GTS. It looks minimally improved over the original.

what? LMFAO...you obviously have not played the game.

 

[SimplexPL]

Have you seen this game? it is not uncharted or master chief collection or the last of us. Its completely re built and it looks leagues ahead of the original game. (apart from some rain)

How is that for "completely re built"?

While Gears of War 4 is in development using Unreal Engine 4, Gears Ultimate instead opts for more familiar ground - the original 2006 source code. From the beginning, the Ultimate Edition was designed to capture the original experience as accurately as possible while updating its presentation for the current generation. More recent versions of Unreal Engine 3, and even UE4, were considered early in development, but the decision to stick with the original codebase was made in order to preserve the original simulation.

 

[Dictator93]

How is that for "completely re built"?

Every single graphical asset was remade as far as I understand it. WHile the gameplay system were purposefully kept the same.

That is more to say than most next gen up-res's rereleased.

 

[Spinifex]

Yes, that is a minimal improvement in the same way that Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD were minimal improvements. It's no slouch graphically, but it should run fine on old hardware -- which it doesn't.

 

[SliChillax]

I should hope not? Why is this something that people proclaim with such smug satisfaction? You shouldn't have any issues with this on a 8800GTS. It looks minimally improved over the original.

Join Neogaf they said, they don't tolerate trolls they said. I like how everyone is an expert over graphics in here and they know better what hardware should run games optimally.

 

[Akronis]

Yes, that is a minimal improvement in the same way that Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD were minimal improvements. It's no slouch graphically, but it should run fine on old hardware -- which it doesn't.

You be trolling or you be blind. Which is it?

 

[Nostremitus]

If I buy a game on Windows Store, is it available on all of my PCs signed on using that account?

 

[napata]

While it is improved it still looks worse than most late last gen games on pc. My old 512mb 4870 could run better looking games than this game. It runs awful in regards to how it looks.

 

[velociraptor]

I'm talking about the general feeling that because this game is running bad on AMD "DX12 is doomed" while the fact that it's running more or less fine on NV is completely ignored for some reason.


Seriously?

Original:

"Minimally improved":

Still looks pretty bad to me.

 

[Afro]

Still looks pretty bad to me.

Game can look beautiful at times. Downsample from 4K, but still.

 

[wwm0nkey]

Still looks pretty bad to me.

It's still vastly improved over the original, an 8800GT just wouldn't cut it with the new version

 

[tuna_love]

If I buy a game on Windows Store, is it available on all of my PCs signed on using that account?

yep

 

[Triscuitable]

Yes, that is a minimal improvement in the same way that Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD were minimal improvements. It's no slouch graphically, but it should run fine on old hardware -- which it doesn't.

You know, trolls don't typically lay it on so thick. The improved lighting and geometry should be a dead giveaway, but if you're just going to keep being objectively wrong, nobody's gonna stop you.

 

[spannicus]

Big labowski

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

running like FUCKING TRASH on my 970 + i5 4670k

 

[dr_rus]

Still looks pretty bad to me.

If you'll find me a better shots of the original from the first couple of levels I may find the time to make a comparison. This was the first shot I've stumbled on in Google.

 

[Soren01]

I'll wait some patches to buy the game. Even 980Ti and Fury cant run it well.

 

[dr_rus]

I'll wait some patches to buy the game. Even 980Ti and Fury cant run it well.

980Ti runs it just fine. 980 and 970 are probably fine as well if you turn texture quality down to make them fit into 4GBs.

 

[lowrider007]

You be trolling or you be blind. Which is it?

It's not always that binary (Simple).

I kind of agree with him and I think it wrong that he is accused of being a troll because he doesn't see the 'dramatic' change that you or others may see, is there no middle ground?, Yes I can see there is a difference but I'm not a graphics expert and on the surface to me it doesn't look a lot different and I'm being genuinely honest, I think it's just a case of different people have a different scales of what they consider largely different.

I've seen people on here say that a game with no AA compared to a game with 4xAA is a massive difference, others would barely see it, I look at those two pictures and yes they look different in many respects but they also look very similar also, I mean they are the same game for a start with many similar components in them, for some people that is enough to be classified as similar, they are not seeing the extra 'tech' in the images.

You have to imagine sometimes that not everyone perceives things as you do.

 

[tuna_love]

It's not always that binary (Simple).

I kind of agree with him and I think it wrong that he is accused of being a troll because he doesn't see the 'dramatic' change that you or others may see, is there no middle ground?, Yes I can see there is a difference but I'm not a graphics expert and on the surface to me it doesn't look a lot different and I'm being genuinely honest, I think it's just a case of different people have a different scales of what they consider largely different.

I've seen people on here say that a game with no AA compared to a game with 4xAA is a massive difference, others would barely see it, I look at those two pictures and yes they look different in many respects but they also look very similar also, I mean they are the same game for a start with many similar components in them, for some people that is enough to be classified as similar, they are not seeing the extra 'tech' in the images.

You have to imagine sometimes that not everyone perceives things as you do.

well I dont think someone who is blind (cant see) should judge

 

[High Fry Frow]

1440p, all max (save for blur), I get 59fps average with rare dips. GPU usage stays around 85% and CPU usage never passes 30%.

4790k
980 ti, OCed to 1400Mhz
16GB
SSD

But the frame pacing is janky as all balls. It gives the illusion of a game hovering around 30-40fps. Reminds me of Bloodbourne in that regard.

 

[Carlius]

980Ti runs it just fine. 980 and 970 are probably fine as well if you turn texture quality down to make them fit into 4GBs.

i have it maxed out with a 970 and its buttery smooth

 

[Celcius]

Getting 57.62 avg fps @ 1080p max settings with 2600k @ 4.6ghz, 16gb ddr3 1600mhz, gtx 780 ti @ stock, samsung 840 pro 256gb ssd
Runs really smooth but sometimes it looks like textures haven't loaded or are taking a long time to load. Not sure if it's due to 3gb vram or just the game / engine.

 

[nkarafo]

I love these comparison shots that show the supposed big graphical leap between the original and this. As if it means anything.

Doesn't matter if the difference is big or small. The original is a 10 years old game. The new version still looks like a 2010 game at best. Should be able to run on a modest PC with ease.

980Ti runs it just fine. 980 and 970 are probably fine as well if you turn texture quality down to make them fit into 4GBs.

Yeah, a plain looking game runs fine on one of the most powerful cards you can buy. You also have to turn textures DOWN to fit into 4GB. So a 2GB card can only handle, what, low?

 

[Celcius]

I love these comparison shots that show the supposed big graphical leap between the original and this. As if it means anything.

Doesn't matter if the difference is big or small. The original is a 10 years old game. The new version still looks like a 2010 game at best. Should be able to run on a modest PC with ease.

wtf am i reading... yeah, a plain looking game runs fine on the fastest card you can buy. You also have to turn textures DOWN to fit into 4GB. I'm grateful.

What's with PC GAF lately?
The original game is 10 years old, this is a fact.
"The new game looks like a 2010 game at best". This is an opinion.
"Should be able to run on a modest PC with ease". This is an opinion.
"a plain looking game". This is an opinion.
Unless you're a developer, I don't see how you're in a position to determine how the new game should run. How do you know how much memory the textures should take up? It does run on a modest pc with ease, check the minimum requirements:

Minimum Requirements
OS: 64 bit Windows 10 – version 1511
Processor: Intel Core i5 @ 2.7Ghz or AMD FX 6-core
Memory: 8 GB RAM (2 GB VRAM)
Graphics: Geforce GTX 650 Ti or Radeon R7 260x
Hard Drive: 60 GB available space
DirectX 12

Higher settings and resolutions will require more power.

 

[holygeesus]

People having issues with frame pacing need to turn off the frame limiting option.

 

[Smash88]

Does this game actually require 16GB of RAM when playing maxed out, or was that all BS?

 

[dr_rus]

Yeah, a plain looking game runs fine on one of the most powerful cards you can buy. You also have to turn textures DOWN to fit into 4GB. So a 2GB card can only handle, what, low?

This game is anything but "plain looking". And yeah, you probably have to go for "low" textures on 2GB card. Why is that surprise you in 2016 on PC?

 

[dark10x]

Yes, that is a minimal improvement in the same way that Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD were minimal improvements. It's no slouch graphically, but it should run fine on old hardware -- which it doesn't.

That's just silly and completely incorrect.

Twilight Princess HD basically runs on the same engine with...new textures. That's it.

Gears Ultimate uses a massively overhauled and more modern version of Unreal Engine 3. Gears was basically the FIRST iteration of UE3 while Ultimate is using techniques in the last release of the engine.

 

[KainXVIII]

This game is anything but "plain looking". And yeah, you probably have to go for "low" textures on 2GB card. Why is that surprise you in 2016 on PC?

He is right though - game looks plain, boring and flat. And DX12 flop don't help either.

 

[X-arlo]

I remember being blown away by the original...but the initial impressions faded as tech progressed quickly. The changes are totally visible but I agree that the overall package is far from remarkable and looks quite dull. The requirements also feel totally unjustified.

 

[nOoblet16]

People still amazed about the requirement, a 980Ti is recommended if you want max settings at 4K/60FPS.
970 if you want max at 1080P/60. Xbone is medium settings at 1080P/30FPS...when you consider all of that it makes sense.

That's just silly and completely incorrect.

Twilight Princess HD basically runs on the same engine with...new textures. That's it.

Gears Ultimate uses a massively overhauled and more modern version of Unreal Engine 3. Gears was basically the FIRST iteration of UE3 while Ultimate is using techniques in the last release of the engine.

Someone will tell you it doesn't matter how many iteration UE3 had because it is still UE3 and as such the same engine since engines can only belong to different generations if they have a different number at the end of their name.

But this is what I don't get when people say Gears UE is a remaster like Zelda HD or Twilight Princess HD. Gears UE is a remake with Gears 1 gameplay code, a remake does not necessarily has to change gameplay. It is a remake by the virtue that they had to remake every single bit and corner of the game except the gameplay engine (which has been tweaked and modified as well)