-
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.
Tomb Raider Definitive Edition (PS4/XB1) is 30 FPS
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
I played the game with TressFx at 1440p locked at 30fps, mostly held that with minimum drops on my 670 and 980x rig. 30fps is perfectly playable with a gamepad to me in most genres, and console gamers should frankly be used to it after last-gen. 60fps is always better, but the amount of whining in this thread is still remarkable. Game was never gonna be 60fps, 30fps is not the least bit surprising.
That's really strange, I maxed the game out with TressFX, 1080p/60fps on my GTX 590.
A 780 should destroy this game.
Spazznid
Member
Mine does. For some reason, though, a lot of people seem to think "Maxed out" means SSAAx4.
It doesn't.
It should . . . maybe he's playing at a high res?
Edit: Or as Spazz says, SSAA would be another culprit.
I suspect not. The games which have operated at 30 fps on the new consoles (ps4 especially) have held that framerate. Look at AC4, for instance.
I think it'll be solid. Its an approach I take on my PC these days with some of the more demanding games and it works. Crank up details and then lock it to 30.
alexandros
Banned
I don't really blame the people who complain about it, 60 fps is really important for the fluidity of gameplay. But these last few months there have been some members of our community that set unrealistic expectations for these consoles' hardware.
Since when?
greycolumbus
The success of others absolutely infuriates me.
Speak for yourself, Amos.
Nizz
Member
My thoughts as well. I'm cool with the frame rate as long as it's locked.
I could have played the game at 60fps(more or less, lol) if I had turned off TressFX, but I didn't. I don't know how, or why, but I enjoyed the game more with the beautiful hair on at a lower fps, with admittedly more eyecandy due to 1440p downsampling. Guess I really am a graphics whore, because 60fps feels better than 30fps, can't even be argued.
Anyway, if the game is a rock solid 30fps, then console gamers should be fine. The only issue I have with this release is the price frankly. Honestly really like that new skin shader too . . .
BruiserBear
Banned
Please explain how they're taking advantage of their fans.
Jawmuncher
Member
WOW taking advantage of Next Gen to the max.
Have to wait for the Definitive Edition to hit PC to get your money's worth it seems at 60....but even that might be a stretch.
Have to wait for the Definitive Edition to hit PC to get your money's worth it seems at 60....but even that might be a stretch.
TressFx isn't the only graphical improvement this version is seeing. It's not a simple port from the last gen consoles so 30 fps it's not that surprising.
I have the game on Steam so I probably won't pay 60 dollars for it but it seems like a great choice for those that never played it before and can now do it with better graphics than before. It also allows CD to "train" there next-gen skills so when the time comes for a new TR game they have tons of know-how.
I have the game on Steam so I probably won't pay 60 dollars for it but it seems like a great choice for those that never played it before and can now do it with better graphics than before. It also allows CD to "train" there next-gen skills so when the time comes for a new TR game they have tons of know-how.
plagiarize
Banned
even just with Tress FX 30 fps isn't that surprising. Many many people in the performance thread for this game on PC, turned off Tress FX because they couldn't get close to a locked 60 fps with it on, on PCs costing much more than $400.
Don't get me wrong, that demonstrates a clear advantage of PC gaming. When you DO favour 60 fps above having all the graphical effects as high as they go, on PC you get to make that call. It's a great part of the platform...
But Tress FX clearly being on in this version made expecting 60 fps incredibly unreasonable. The majority of people who played this game on PC with Tress FX on, did not play it at 60 fps. I know I didn't.
We had that choice, yes. Yay PC gaming. But it doesn't say anything bad about the PS4 version that it can't hit 60 fps on a game that required a four figure PC to hit 60 fps on a year ago with Tress FX enabled.
And... if the Xbox One version is identical, we'll know the PS4 isn't being pushed as far as it can be pushed, but we'll have to wait to see there.
Mithos
Member
I couldn't max out the game either on my 660Ti. Doing some mixed settings between Off->Ultra I got ~60fps.
My post in Tomb Raider PC Performance Thread and turning TressFX on dropped that fps shown in benchmark with ~20-30fps.
N0REGARD4L1FE
Banned
I'd prefer 60 but I loved the UC games and they were only 30 so I will survive. If TR is another qte fest like Ryse I think I will pass though. Not sure how true that is.
CitizenCope
Member
It's just a bummer is all. =( Being a console gamer only and going to PAX and seeing the beautiful 60fps pc games on big screens was such a tease. The difference between the two are amazing to my eyes. Can't believe some people can't tell the difference.
Man a lot of PC gamers coming out of the woodwork to bash the next Gen consoles and this game here. I mean $60 is a bit ridiculous, but that's what price drops and sales are for. It's nice to have choices right? There's no freakin' need to bash someone else's system of choice to make yourself feel better about yours.
The Definitive Edition will NOT be $60, PC gamers aren't dumb enough to fall for that when they know they can just get the regular version for $5 and they're not starving for games.
At most, it will be $20-30 and even that is too much.
It's definitely not as bad as Ryse in terms of repetitive, scripted QTE gameplay. But the first one or two hours are pretty QTE-heavy. It opens up quite a bit after that and you get to explore some pretty big environments. All in all it's a third-person shooter first and an adventure game second, though, so if that's not your thing, the game probably won't be for you.
There is no objective way to tell which version is "more" definitive in this case, though. Both versions have features which the other one doesn't.
CitizenCope
Member
You'd be wrong.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Because feature wise and artists vision wise, it IS the definitive version.
We PC folk can always crank the resolution, framerate, and AA/AF higher, but that does not make this version any less definitive.
Sometimes y'all are so silly.
This looks like a solid effort by these devs, and is exactly what I would like to see in a theoretical TLoU definitive edition.
1080p, enhanced lighting, physics, effects, geometry, particles, depth of field, texture resolution, and LoD.
All that and TLoU on PS4 would look amazing. Even at just a solid 30. 60 would be a godsend, but not necessary.
It's more than a res bump come on.
1080p, high buffer, a good AF, steady 30 fps, TLoU would be like the return of Jesus in the earth. I almost tempted to buy it even at full price for this achievement.
It was an enjoyable game at 30 (there or thereabouts) and I'm sure it will be the same here. 60 is always nice, but not nearly as perennially essential as all the prima donnas around here would have you believe.
The price is the bigger issue, considering we're not too far clear of the original release, but I dare say that it won't be long before it drops. You can already pre-order it for <£40 in the UK. Give it a month and you'll be able to snap it up for £30 (or less), I bet.
The price is the bigger issue, considering we're not too far clear of the original release, but I dare say that it won't be long before it drops. You can already pre-order it for <£40 in the UK. Give it a month and you'll be able to snap it up for £30 (or less), I bet.
Chance Hale
Member
Didn't Maldo's comparison show this version is lacking the PC version's Tessellation and doesn't really look better? Comes out soon enough I suppose, will be interesting to see how much is changed.
OldAsUrSock
Banned
No you are clueless. The people that want 60fps are not asking for max PC settings. The only req is 1080p 60fps. The graphics can be whatever as long as that req is met.
It depends how low your standards are. I pay hundreds/thousands of pounds to ensure my games look the best they can, at a minimum 60FPS. I don't expect consoles to match this, but it's stupid to consider a 30fps version with slightly altered (I won't say better.... yet) models/lighting as a "definitive" version. Definitive for consoles sure, but when you've previously played the game at 1400p in 60fps on PC with everything set to maximum, it just makes you look a bit silly. It'a a marketing buzzword, nothing more.
plagiarize
Banned
'better' is going to be a matter of opinion. It's missing some things the PC version has (like tessellation, although they have added more polygons to all the base models and environment, albeit probably using methods that aren't that different to tessellation), and it adds some stuff the PC version doesn't have.
the lighting is definitely better. Lara is technically more impressive, whether you prefer her new face or not. the physics are definitely better too. particle effects are definitely better.
so, there you have it.
GardenSirens
Banned
Really??? Still is going to be fun as hell to play, but 30...come on. For 60 bucks?
Dictator93
Member
DOes this game even have gameplay, let alone gameplay which requires 60 fps?
Isnt this basically a cinematic rollercoaster game?!
OBviously, 30fps sucks and all... but does this game really need any more given the player agency in it and the lack of super precise timing?
Isnt this basically a cinematic rollercoaster game?!
OBviously, 30fps sucks and all... but does this game really need any more given the player agency in it and the lack of super precise timing?
GayForMaster
Banned
What a JOKE LOL. Not hype at all for this *pops 360 version*
Gunplay and combat is a big deal in this game and always works much better at higher framerates. Likewise, jumping and movement in this game is a big factor, which means more precision and less input lag at 60fps or above.
I never understood that whole genre-based apologist approach to framerates. ALL games work better at 60fps, period.
I was fiddling with the settings on the PC version just this morning, and, with TressFX and Tessellation turned off (Tress and Tess, the framerate-killers), I can hit framerates between 30-45 at 1080p. Mostly around 40fps from the little bit of gameplay I did just now. Oh, and that's in full 3D, forgot to mention that. So I guess you could call it 80fps, really.
I'm still anxiously awaiting actual GAF-user (not IGN bullshit) comparisons between maxxed-out PC version and this "new" version. My PC at absolutely maximum everything sits at around 30fps or so, so that would be a pretty fair comparison, methinks.
I'm still anxiously awaiting actual GAF-user (not IGN bullshit) comparisons between maxxed-out PC version and this "new" version. My PC at absolutely maximum everything sits at around 30fps or so, so that would be a pretty fair comparison, methinks.