Huggers
Member
The Dead Rising franchise has an history of poor framerate, at this point, the fanbase will be used to it.
Oh in which case that's okay. I hadn't realised they were used to it......
The Dead Rising franchise has an history of poor framerate, at this point, the fanbase will be used to it.
yeah, no.
The game can easily be made on 360/PS3/WiiU at that resolution and framerate.
GTA:V even looks better in most areas than these:
An example of the weird fuzzing.
![]()
DDR3 is way to slow for next gen, its a massive bottleneck on the already weaker GPU which only goes on to limit the system further, you can improve things with the faster edram but not by much due to it's limited size.
I remember when games used to be about fun - not how many pixels or FPS any particular title can push around the screen.
25fps or 30fps - still looks like a lot of fun to me!
The thing is that with regards to that, it is usually the AI (from what i know) that eats all the CPU time. Dead rising has pretty simple (and rightly so for zombies) AI so it shouldn't really be a CPU problem.
Someone at MS is now getting spanked for moneyhatting this one.
I'd place it solely on this reason alone. and nobody else is to blame but Microsoft.These developers have been making games for years, sure some of it can be blamed on a immature platform and development tools, but some of the blame is also shared by the hardware.
What kind of kinky stuff is Microsoft in to....
It would take very very severe technical issues to get a fan not to buy something on their account. This is a low bar, no?
This result is embarrassing honestly. I won't not buy a game because the framerate sucks but this is really unacceptable this gen. The hardware is powerful enough to give me a standard 30 fps (I hope). If it needed more time in the oven they should have delayed it.
Chairs on the Titanic.I just found out that this is the most pre-ordered title for One at Amazon. There'll be a lot of disappointed folks when they find out the truth. Better change the order to another game, STAT!
You cannot squeeze water out of rocks brother.
I just found out that this is the most pre-ordered title for One at Amazon. There'll be a lot of disappointed folks when they find out the truth. Better change the order to another game, STAT!
Damn, what a disappointment. One thing I just can't tolerate is bad framerate. Looks like I'll be skipping out on this game. Sorry, Capcom Vancouver, I know you guys must've worked your asses off.
Edit: Ok, Y2Kev.Holy shit! LOL. Is Hindle....legit? Like I don't want to accuse or insinuate but that is a pretty hilarious collection of quotes.
Framebuffer measurements give us our first indication of the quality of this multi-platform project. The Xbox 360 version of Dead Rising 2 runs at native 720p resolution with the bonus addition of 2x multi-sampling anti-aliasing. The edge-smoothing is welcome: the engine concentrates on handling huge numbers of zombies with plenty of draw distance, so the actual levels of geometry in the environments are fairly basic. In short, there are plenty of large edges to smooth!
The PS3 version of the game shares the 2x MSAA of its 360 counterpart, but the unfortunate reality is that resolution has been compromised. There's little doubt that Dead Rising 2 on the Sony platform is running sub-HD, with 1024x576 appearing to be the game's native resolution. On the plus side, the quality of the upscaling to 720p isn't that bad, and while the edges still look a bit rough as a result, the overall impression is fine.
However, such a big resolution drop is clear evidence that Blue Castle had issues bringing the game to the PlayStation 3, and this is born out in other elements of the game's look and feel, most notably the overall performance level.
For the most part, Dead Rising 2 on 360 does a fairly decent job of maintaining its capped 30FPS, but there are clearly some "gotchas" that can send performance plummeting. In particular, the outdoor scenes with the huge view distance seem to cause a problem, with consecutive frames running over-budget, resulting in occasional, jarring drops to a sustained, jerky 20FPS.
The usual solution developers employ is to disengage v-sync when running under 30FPS - image coherency will diminish, but response from the controls isn't impacted quite so much. Blue Castle Games appear to have chosen image quality over controller lag in these difficult scenes, and the drop in response is so pronounced that you can't help but wonder if this was the right decision to make
Yes, I'm cleaning up the thread and I didn't like what you had replied to (nothing about your post).
Guys, keep it civil. No name calling. Stop talking about salt. No personal attacks. This is a technical discussion. Bans will be severe.
Yes, I'm cleaning up the thread and I didn't like what you had replied to (nothing about your post).
Guys, keep it civil. No name calling. Stop talking about salt. No personal attacks. This is a technical discussion. Bans will be severe.
devs should have the balls in 2013 to thrash games if they dont reach to hit the lower bar of the playble perfomance...(30fps)....
if the console was too weak they should put less zombie in...
i repeat...this is and ONLY a dev problem......the hw here is out of topic
i repeat...this is and ONLY a dev problem......the hw here is out of topic
These developers have been making games for years, sure some of it can be blamed on a immature platform and development tools, but some of the blame is also shared by the hardware.
Do you think people will care that the game runs at 15-25fps then? I agree that resolution and graphics can be ignored if the gameplay is unique and really fun but bad framerate kills any good game.
I know that people are that stupid.
There's a reason why Dead Rising 2 doesn't look like The Last of us and it's the same reason why DR3 should be compared to past DR games, not GOW3 or TLOU.
If people can't see how this IS much better than the best of current gen, on a brute force raw performance basis, then they should probably avoid technical discussions, because it's clear they have no clue what they are talking about.
Direct frame buffer captures...
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
This is a huge downer. I'd come to accept the disappointing resolution, but sub 20 fps? That's seriously atrocious.
The game still looks fun, but there's no sugar-coating this.
Devs only have 1.18 Tflops to work with, this is a hardware issue.
Holy shit.
Was debating getting this over Ryse, but fuck that noise.
All I can say is Halo 5 better blow my mother fucking mind or this will be my biggest gaming purchase disappointment since the Wii.
Yes, I'm cleaning up the thread and I didn't like what you had replied to (nothing about your post).
Guys, keep it civil. No name calling. Stop talking about salt. No personal attacks. This is a technical discussion. Bans will be severe.
And somehow I missed that one...Edit: Ok, Y2Kev.
i know most of ppl would end there.....
sorry leghorn...this time the tf are the wrong place to find the problem
I'd place it solely on this reason alone. and nobody else is to blame but Microsoft.
Do you think this game's performance is maxing out the hardware? this is the HW's peak?
The textures in that picture with the car and rocks look horrendous. Fuck.
Can't even manage a locked 30 FPS at 720p? On next-gen hardware? Wow.
Guess I was right in waiting for this console to mature and drop in price. This is truly disappointing.
Just click on the number of posts column in the thread index.Then I guess there's no point now in asking how to easily see how many messages per user in this thread. When you start to see the same patterns in certain individuals pop up all over the place it become quite clear their messaging.
If more games end up like this are you going to say they are all just lazy devs?
It doesn't look better than DR2. DR2 was designed well, it has a intriguing environment, nice colors, textures, etc. DR3 looks like poop soup.The game looks much better from Dead Rising 2. But , that goes all out the window if frame rate is poor.