How do you think cboat hears all this dirt?
-
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.
GiantBomb - TitanFall framerate in mech combat is not fixed in Xbox One retail code
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
- Status
How do you think cboat hears all this dirt?
NullPointer
Member
True irony would be if 720p + alpha textures would lead to a locked down 60fps
But, sucks to hear the performance issues persist with Titans filling the screen. But Respawn did talk about tweaks post-launch, so hopefully they keep to their "Framerate above all" mantra rather than just upping the resolution.
the extent of the cartoonification of MS's villainy is kind of bordering on self-parody now
How did the alpha run?
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
I don't even understand why they even bothered with 792P.
Why not just go with 720P.
Is that extra miniscule resolution bump really going to make a difference?
Why not just go with 720P.
Is that extra miniscule resolution bump really going to make a difference?
You're right. A game has never before been pushed out before it was done only to be patched and optimized later... What was I thinking?
GavinUK86
Member
Indeed, I don't even understand why people think MS has any notable control over the title. Maybe MS could ask if it's possible to bump the resolution, but I seriously doubt they're making any demands about the technical specs of the game, or the release date.
Bumblebeetuna
Gold Member
If it's as good as it was in the beta then I won't have any issues. I spent tons of time on it on my Xbone and only a couple times noticed a momentary lapse in frame rate. I'm sure it fluctuates quite a bit, but enough to be noticeable.. who knows.
Metalingus5150
Member
For all the Titanfall players in this thread.
I just want to say I hope Respawn fixes this, you guys deserve to have a locked frame rate and no tearing.
I just want to say I hope Respawn fixes this, you guys deserve to have a locked frame rate and no tearing.
Netherscourge
Banned
According to sources, that extra 72p was needed to make CBOAT look bad.
But, I can't confirm or deny those sources.
geordiemp
Member
The game has released at retail with tearing and frame rate that is very low and noticeable to more than 1 reviewer.
So the poster has a relevant point in that the game does run poorly now and it has released to the shops..
so how much of a chance is there that we get of improved framerate / improved IQ and improved resolution post release...Like this happens often LOL....
What is your point exactly ....?
NullPointer
Member
No idea. Haven't played it, but I remember reports here and on other sites about framerate issues in the beta when there were several Titans on screen firing at each other. Seems like that's still an issue at times.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
Looks like CBoat may end up coming out ahead after all, if this is true.
Agreed, and personally I don't think there's any practical way to get up to 1080p.
I imagine it will, it won't look nearly as good though.
The people thinking it's being hidden because it's basically the same are going to be surprised. As bad as TF looks, it still looks way way better than CoD on PS360. Assuming it's 60fps, it's going to be 640p or whatever.
Fixed for accuracy.
Phht, so it can hear, obviously.
Not my point. Single digit framerate, is straight up broken. Unacceptable. Unplayable.
EA has been releasing their master jank kraken all year and only solidifies the notion that they are not interested in releasing quality products.
I've worked for Activison and EA (among others in the 10 years I was in the game industry). I understand the process of releasing a game. Both of these companies meet deadlines and could give a fuck less if the game is not ready.
Kagoshima_Luke
Gold Member
As someone who writes reviews myself, I imagine this was the case.
That said, I strongly disagree with the "it doesn't bother me so don't mention it" take on game reviewing. Major frame rate dips, especially in FPS games, is going to be a big deal to a lot of people, and anyone who plays/reviews a lot of games would know this. To completely omit this just because it didn't alter your personal perception of the game is incredibly selfish and defeats the entire purpose of the review (to let others know whether the game in question is worth buying/playing).
Complete objectivity is unachievable, of course, but some reviewers don't even try.
640p? Seriously?! My god, I'd throw up on that resolution.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
Not as well as the BETA.
I'm not saying it's a big deal, just that it's not going to look as good.
So that's why the game is sittng at 87 on Metacritic? That's quite a high score for an unacceptable and unplayable game.
People here act like the game is completely unplayable.. There is furthermore no way MS will "ruin" the experience for people in order to put a 'person' like CBOAT in negative light. If people actually believe such a thing they really are out of their minds/way too fanatic. Fanboys are really showing their true selves in topics like these.
30 - 60 FPS is very low?
Infinity Ward could conceivably eliminate extreme framerate drops through optimization/bug fixing, if for example they are caused by specific constraints (eg. being CPU bound in certain situations).
They may also have headroom to increase the resolution post launch (like on the PS4 with Assassin's Creed). It would be unrealistic to expect say locked 60 FPS *and* a resolution increase.
Quadraphonic
Member
720p became a toxic resolution to have. A large stigma is attached to it simply because it's the next step down from 1080p on TVs. So people associate it with being a step down.
792p is in between, so it means that it's HIGHER than that, even if it's not perfect.
It has everything to do with sacrificing framerate to gain a little bit of "We're not 720p"
Yoda
Member
As has been stated in this thread just lowering the resolution in isolation won't help the framerate when lots of stuff is happening on screen (titan fights).
SneakyStephan
Banned
called it
the second they mentioned they 'upgraded' the source engine with their own code I suggested they were likely to break it to where it now runs like shit while still looking like shit.
not that I'm happy my cynicism was correct, my first reaction to them announcing using source was YAY I love source cos it'll run on a toaster and doesn't have the streaming stutter that ue3 and co have
the second they mentioned they 'upgraded' the source engine with their own code I suggested they were likely to break it to where it now runs like shit while still looking like shit.
not that I'm happy my cynicism was correct, my first reaction to them announcing using source was YAY I love source cos it'll run on a toaster and doesn't have the streaming stutter that ue3 and co have
Oh wait, you're right. Metacritic. I take back everything I just said. Reviewers playing the game in a non-retail environment under an optimal and controlled setting. Yet STILL we are seeing reports of single digits for Xbone. Give me a break. Metacritic is a pretty poor scale for quality. But fuck quality right? At least its getting those awesome scores so it can mislead consumers.
My advice: PC version or bust.
I was under the impression the performance hit was with the Titans because of the smoke effects, the alpha transparencies are GPU heavy.
And most importantly, hella sexy net code.
That's ok, for some of us it only really screwed up with the mechs on PC anyway.
And yeah, this doesn't really surprise me. I do imagine that by proxy it means any hopes of significant performance boosts on PC from after the beta aren't going to be there.
3rdamention
Member
I think there is very basic inconsistency in review policies amongst all these different sites. They just make up the rules and their policies with each new review, instead of standing by what is at one point so important to them. These sites allow these "journalists" to say what they want, and then run with it. So you end up with stuff like this from Polygon's Call of Duty Ghosts Review:
"For a multiplayer shooter, framerate consistency is paramount".
Gies defended the review, he was the one that edited the review, and said if it doesn't affect gameplay, like having a much higher resolution, then it doesn't affect the score. But if it does affect gameplay, they will dock the score. So they dock the PS4 version cause the framerate was running too fast at times, making it fluctuate.
Then you fast forward to Polygon's Gies Titanfall Review and you get:
"If there are complaints to be had, I'd point to performance. Titanfall sits at 60 frames per second most of the time, but when three or four Titans are on the screen at once, firing rockets and arc blasts, things take a dive. It's never not playable, but it is noticeable."
"Takes a dive" and "It's never not playable, but it is noticeble!" Pretty clearly point out that the framerate is noticeable, it would obviously affect gameplay in a multiplayer only game, but this time, it doesn't really matter! It's like these sites change their narratives to fit into what they want to say this month.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim
I wouldn't go as far as calling TF unplayable though.
SneakyStephan
Banned
hella sexy compared to cryengine and frostbite for sure (and better than unreal engine too)
They said they redid the netcode as well (WHY) so I'm half expecting reports of clientside prediction shenanigans like getting shot around corners or tekken style double KO's but we'll see
This is a minor and rarely-occurring issue, made worse by the fact that nobody who is flipping out about it even played the beta.
The game does not chug down to 7 FPS anytime there's a few Titans on screen. There are rare hitches that mostly seem to happen when one or more Titans explode in the middle of a tense firefight. And by "rare" I mean that I saw this happen a few times out of probably 100 multiplayer matches.
The game does not chug down to 7 FPS anytime there's a few Titans on screen. There are rare hitches that mostly seem to happen when one or more Titans explode in the middle of a tense firefight. And by "rare" I mean that I saw this happen a few times out of probably 100 multiplayer matches.
That is a bold claim, right there.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
Dude, I think most people are smart enough to realize that 792P is still a major step down from 1080P and not much of a difference from 720P.
If Misocroft is trying to obfuscate the 720P controversy with this step, then its a major failure. Especially, if it hurts performance on a game that relies on a high framerate like this one.
I don't see how someone could have come out of the beta with the belief that single-digit framerates are even remotely common or that the framedrops that are there made the game literally unplayable. That's simply not how it was at all.
Quadraphonic
Member
Well, the idea goes that MS allowed them to use the untapped % of the GPU reserved for the Kinect to get those gains, so they technically lost no framerate.
But you'd also admit this isn't the first curious move made by Respawn, Microsoft OR EA.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
I played the BETA on a decent PC and the dips and tear issues are the reason why I'm not buying it.
Or one of the reasons, at least. The other being EA.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Oh, I can assure you, those people are out there. And I'd bet at least half of them don't realize Titanfall is coming to Xbox 360.
CouchMaster
Member
Same. I almost picked up an Xbone but figured if I add couple of hundred dollars I can build a decent PC that can run this game. Xbone being $500 actually made it easier to make that decision.
I wouldn't hire Mr goose to flip burgers let alone do anything with consistency. Just ignore that clown.
I like how Jeff saying it hit single digits once in his time playing it, when shit got crazy in Last titan standing, equates to a broken game now. It's shit, but it's not exactly common. It happened to me once during the beta too, lasted for maybe 2 seconds and then recovered. 2 seconds out of 10 hours, if the final game is the same, I think I'll survive..
- Status