Support NeoGAF

[antitrop]

50fps average? It barely ever reaches 50fps on xb1 unless alone indoors. It generally sits between 40-50 in combat with some dips.

Well, I only have the PC version of the game, but Digital Foundry's XB1 benchmark doesn't look nearly as bad as you make it sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPBoOJ71hUM

Looks kinda something like 50fps average to me.

 

[Synth]

Well, I only have the PC version of the game, but Digital Foundry's XB1 benchmark doesn't look nearly as bad as you make it sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPBoOJ71hUM

Looks kinda something like 50fps average to me.

Yea some people are going to some incredible extremes to try and portray the look/performance of the 360 version as being close to the X1's. There's no way a 30fps lock for the X1 version makes any sense, you'd have to be insane to think so. Does this also make the X1 version of Tomb Raider better for having a locked framerate?

 

[SwiftDeath]

lol this thread has already taken a significantly different turn than the previous Digital Foundry thread for this

I'll just say that Bluepoint did a fantastic job with what they had to work with and that the XB1 version is clearly the superior console version.

 

[Alpolio]

I just bought the 360 version and it plays great. It's hard looking at it after putting down the PS4's Second Son. The frame rate & screen tear isn't the problem. It's the low res graphics that bothers me. But the XB1 isn't that much of an improvement, so I'm OK with the 360 port.

 

[AgentP]

Well, I only have the PC version of the game, but Digital Foundry's XB1 benchmark doesn't look nearly as bad as you make it sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPBoOJ71hUM

Looks kinda something like 50fps average to me.

Maybe, this one is a bit worse, maybe its the map.

 

[Sporran]

Bluepoint's Tech Interview with DF

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-titanfall-xbox-360-tech-interview

 

[Codiox]

Do u think its worth to rent this on x360 just to see what the fuzz is about titanfall? Wanna try it but have no xbone/good pc.

 

[ron_bato]

Do u think its worth to rent this on x360 just to see what the fuzz is about titanfall? Wanna try it but have no xbone/good pc.

Sure, from all the impressions I've read, it's something that you have to experience to see if it's for you. So yeah, I would say you should rent it to see if it's for you.

I'll be getting my copy soon, and buy a 3 month gold subscription to see if it's for me. Glad to see that Blue Point done good with this port.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Bluepoint's Tech Interview with DF

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-titanfall-xbox-360-tech-interview

Sounds like Respawn were pretty involved with the 360 port too.

Good read, thanks for posting.

 

[ricelord]

dat screen tearing...

 

[Guess Who]

Bluepoint's Tech Interview with DF

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-titanfall-xbox-360-tech-interview

Great interview.

So, basically, Titanfall 360 is running a damn near entirely different graphics engine with only the gameplay logic left intact. Damn.

 

[jufonuk]

is this MP only?, I may pick it up for the 360 at a later date but I don't fancy paying for live.

can you play against computer controlled AI?

I haven't really read to much on this.
if a stupid question, sorry

 

[Nicktendo86]

is this MP only?, I may pick it up for the 360 at a later date but I don't fancy paying for live.

can you play against computer controlled AI?

I haven't really read to much on this.
if a stupid question, sorry

Online mp only.

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

So it turns out the Xbox One version is far superior. Who would have thought. The other thread was telling me they are basically identical. It is to be expected tho

 

[Kydd BlaZe]

Let's put it this way - If Titanfall launched on both XB1 and 360 on the same day, and was priced at $60/$30, respectively, I would still buy the XB1 version.

However, I wouldn't buy an XB1 just for one game. If there are other games that interest you other than Titanfall, the choice is simple.

I just don't understand how people could defend how ugly the game is on 360. Not only do we see a big resolution difference, but also lower quality textures, a washed out color palette, missing or completely changed lighting, a frame rate that fluctuates anywhere between 30-50 (it's still worse than XB1 since it stays in the lower range more often) that can dip even lower, a reduction in particles/explosions, reduced grunts/AI soldiers in LTS mode, and the worst screen tearing I've ever seen. Having to lock the frame rate at 30hz (lol) just to reduce the horrific tearing, but not fully eliminating it, is not the way Titanfall should be played, and definitely not on par with the XB1 version. Stop being crazy, people.

So...much...this....

Couldn't have said it better, myself.

 

[scitek]

Admirable job by Bluepoint, but I don't know how anyone could play either console version, to be honest. I hate screen tearing more than anything, though. For an early generation title running on the Source engine, it's surprising how poorly it performs on everything.

 

[MisterXDTV]

I just don't understand how people could defend how ugly the game is on 360. Not only do we see a big resolution difference, but also lower quality textures, a washed out color palette, missing or completely changed lighting, a frame rate that fluctuates anywhere between 30-50 (it's still worse than XB1 since it stays in the lower range more often) that can dip even lower, a reduction in particles/explosions, reduced grunts/AI soldiers in LTS mode, and the worst screen tearing I've ever seen. Having to lock the frame rate at 30hz (lol) just to reduce the horrific tearing, but not fully eliminating it, is not the way Titanfall should be played, and definitely not on par with the XB1 version. Stop being crazy, people.

There's nothing to defend: Bluepoint did a miracle job running what is considered the XOne (2013 Hardware) system seller on 2005 hardware.
The frame rate is often higher than the XONE version, the tearing is bad even on the XONE version.

Did you expect the X360 tu run better than it does?
I think this is already embarassing enough for the ONE, the console that launched at 500 $/€ SIX MONTHS AGO compared to the console that was made 9 YEARS ago.

 

[EvB]

There's nothing to defend: Bluepoint did a miracle job running what is considered the XOne (2013 Hardware) system seller on 2005 hardware.
The frame rate is often higher than the XONE version, the tearing is bad even on the XONE version.

Did you expect the X360 tu run better than it does?
I think this is already embarassing enough for the ONE, the console that launched at 500 $/€ SIX MONTHS AGO compared to the console that was made 9 YEARS ago.

It's no more or less embarrassing that Assassins Creed Black Flag runs on Ps4 AND PS4 OR Need for Speed or Battlefield 4.

 

[MisterXDTV]

It's no more or less embarrassing that Assassins Creed Black Flag runs on Ps4 AND PS4 OR Need for Speed or Battlefield 4.

Did you see the performance of AC IV on PS4 compared to PS3?..

And anyway Sony didn't market any of those games as the "next gen experience" and delayed the PS3 version to sell more PS4 consoles. So bad comparison...

 

[dark10x]

Yea some people are going to some incredible extremes to try and portray the look/performance of the 360 version as being close to the X1's. There's no way a 30fps lock for the X1 version makes any sense, you'd have to be insane to think so. Does this also make the X1 version of Tomb Raider better for having a locked framerate?

Maybe not a 30 fps lock but they really really should have used triple buffering. The tearing is just awful on XO. I'd rather play at 30 fps with no tearing over an unstable frame-rate with non-stop tearing.

It's no more or less embarrassing that Assassins Creed Black Flag runs on Ps4 AND PS4 OR Need for Speed or Battlefield 4.

I dunno, all three of those games run much *MUCH* slower on PS3 versus PS4 and feature significant graphical changes. BF4 barely looks like the same game.

At least Titanfall on 360 uses the same map geometry.

 

[gatti-man]

There's nothing to defend: Bluepoint did a miracle job running what is considered the XOne (2013 Hardware) system seller on 2005 hardware.
The frame rate is often higher than the XONE version, the tearing is bad even on the XONE version.

Did you expect the X360 tu run better than it does?
I think this is already embarassing enough for the ONE, the console that launched at 500 $/€ SIX MONTHS AGO compared to the console that was made 9 YEARS ago.

The framerate is not higher on the 360 version. This is just a flat out lie.

 

[EvB]

And anyway Sony didn't market any of those games as the "next gen experience" and delayed the PS3 version to sell more PS4 consoles. So bad comparison...

I'm reading the Digital foundry comparison of AC4 right now and it very much sounds like a very similar situation to 360/Xbox One Titanfall, the "next gen" Version runs at a more consistent frame rate with more effects and at a higher resolution.

As for the delay that is 100% speculation, it's been clearly stated on numerous occasions (including the interview from Bluepoint games) that the 360 one was running several weeks behind the main version, this meant that the 360 version would always be released after the main version unless they held back the main version, which they clearly weren't prepared to do, probably due to millions and millions of $'s worth of advertising having been booked months in advance for specific time slots.

 

[SapientWolf]

Maybe not a 30 fps lock but they really really should have used triple buffering. The tearing is just awful on XO. I'd rather play at 30 fps with no tearing over an unstable frame-rate with non-stop tearing.


I dunno, all three of those games run much *MUCH* slower on PS3 versus PS4 and feature significant graphical changes. BF4 barely looks like the same game.

At least Titanfall on 360 uses the same map geometry.

Triple buffering requires memory to store the extra buffer, and we all know where the One's bottleneck is.

 

[BruiserBear]

The framerate is not higher on the 360 version. This is just a flat out lie.

It is, for a few seconds, during a particular moment in the campaign. So you take that nugget and spin it across the entire game, and wallah, you have a troll post!

 

[EvB]

It is, for a few seconds, during a particular moment in the campaign. So you take that nugget and spin it across the entire game, and wallah, you have a troll post!

It's even better now we have screenshots that represent a few seconds of framerate!

 

[The Llama]

Great interview.

So, basically, Titanfall 360 is running a damn near entirely different graphics engine with only the gameplay logic left intact. Damn.

Kinda makes me wonder what the performance would be like if they did a quick port of the 360 version to the XB1. Dare I say it might perform better than Respawns?

 

[MisterXDTV]

The framerate is not higher on the 360 version. This is just a flat out lie.

There are some moments where it is. Anyway the X360 is running 45fps average, I don't think XONE is doing better.

I'm reading the Digital foundry comparison of AC4 right now and it very much sounds like a very similar situation to 360/Xbox One Titanfall, the "next gen" Version runs at a more consistent frame rate with more effects and at a higher resolution

AC IV on PS4 is 1080p/30 locked and is comparable to the PC version for IQ. Titanfall is not THAT better on the One compared to the 360...

 

[HTupolev]

Does triple buffering not work on the Bone/360?

It does, but it's inferior to just ditching vsync in terms of input latency performance.

In that respect, triple-buffering can sometimes actually be worse than double-buffered vsync in circumstances where performance is hovering just about a harmonic fraction of the refresh rate (i.e. 35fps).

 

[antitrop]

The framerate is not higher on the 360 version. This is just a flat out lie.

The sad part is, this myth will probably be perpetuated so much that people will actually start believe it, without bothering to actually watch the DF graphs for themselves.

 

[soul creator]

The sad part is, this myth will probably be perpetuated so much that people will actually start believe it, without bothering to actually watch the DF graphs for themselves.

lol, yeah. I keep trying to find out where this was confirmed, since I notice people keep mentioning it. Like you said, DF's graphs show the opposite (unless of course, you take one screenshot in one particular spot, and use that to represent the entirety of the platform differences!).

It seems like the only way the 360 could be considered "better" is if someone is extremely sensitive to screen tearing, and absolutely must have a lock option for anything to be playable for them, and then literally nothing else outweighs that desire. So by that very specific measure, the 360 is "better". But otherwise...

My theory is that there is still a big "Xbox One is not worth $500, Titanfall is not a next-gen killer app!" segment of gamers that are heavily invested in anything that confirms that theory, lol. That said, it's totally fine if someone doesn't think the game is worth paying $500 to play or whatever. But that's a separate discussion from whether one version of the game is better or not.

 

[BruiserBear]

There are some moments where it is. Anyway the X360 is running 45fps average, I don't think XONE is doing better.

"Some moments" is quite a bit different than your previous description of "often higher". You're entitled to your opinion on this forum, but not your own facts.

 

[MisterXDTV]

"Some moments" is quite a bit different than your previous description of "often higher". You're entitled to your opinion on this forum, but not your own facts.

Yeah, you are right I made a mistake, I apologize. I just think it's unfair to Bluepoint to say that Titanfall on X360 is horrible while on XONE is a great game... But that's just my opinion....

 

[BruiserBear]

Yeah, you are right I made a mistake, I apologize. I just think it's unfair to Bluepoint to say that Titanfall on X360 is horrible while on XONE is a great game... But that's just my opinion....

Well, for a lot of people 600p vs 792p is a pretty big difference. If you saw both versions running side by side you would instantly recognize one looked much better than the other, and ran smoother overall.

Everyone knows Bluepoint did a great job.

 

[dark10x]

My theory is that there is still a big "Xbox One is not worth $500, Titanfall is not a next-gen killer app!" segment of gamers that are heavily invested in anything that confirms that theory

I shelled out a lot more than $500 for a Bone thanks awful exchange rates (more like $694) and I feel that Titanfall massively underperforms on XO. Yes, it runs a bit faster than 360 but it is NOT smooth on its own. The games makes severe sacrifices in the frame-rate and image quality department. I could deal with the low resolution it it had been 60 fps but when you have bad iq and a poor frame-rate it really sucks. It simply doesn't feel like a top tier product due to its wildly unstable frame-rate and nonstop tearing.

The 360 is almost ten years old at this point. The gap here is much too small. Multi platform games are performing better at this point. BF4 looks and runs much better than Titanfall in comparison.

 

[mullet2000]

It is, for a few seconds, during a particular moment in the campaign. So you take that nugget and spin it across the entire game, and wallah, you have a troll post!

"wallah"?

 

[ethomaz]

I agree wit DF... they need a 30fps lock on Xbone too.

 

[MisterXDTV]

I shelled out a lot more than $500 for a Bone thanks awful exchange rates (more like $694) and I feel that Titanfall massively underperforms on XO. Yes, it runs a bit faster than 360 but it is NOT smooth on its own. The games makes severe sacrifices in the frame-rate and image quality department. I could deal with the low resolution it it had been 60 fps but when you have bad iq and a poor frame-rate it really sucks. It simply doesn't feel like a top tier product due to its wildly unstable frame-rate and nonstop tearing.

The 360 is almost ten years old at this point. The gap here is much too small. Multi platform games are performing better at this point. BF4 looks and runs much better than Titanfall in comparison.

That's exactly what I meant. The gap is not that big considering the 360 is very old at this point, 9 years in technology usually is a huge timeframe....
Smartphones and tablets become old after 9-12 months by now.