What are you even talking about?
Games like this are the exception, not the rule.
-
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.
Quantum Break PC and Xbox One Patch in the Works
- Thread starter SumptuousLemur
- Start date
What are you even talking about?
Games like this are the exception, not the rule.
I felt like I needed to learn some Common Core math to optimize the experience after reading it. I appreciate the technical knowledge but it's stupidly complicated sounding for PC and makes me think the game is being "emulated" in Windows 10.
dr_rus
Member
Not true. DX12 provides more options in organizing the mGPU rendering by the devs. They can just use the same old DX11 style AFR on implicit multiadapter and this will be the exact same effort as in DX11. Or they can use something better than AFR now and that will require some effort of course.
No, it's not. Current NV drivers are fine and 362.00 isn't in any way better. The funniest part is that 362.00 hasn't even brought any fixes compared to 361.91. It's on Remedy to make sure that their game works on the latest released driver version instead of suggesting to install something from two months ago. This just shows that they haven't even tested the PC version on NV's h/w let alone optimized the engine for it.
Bits N Pieces
Member
Surely we need some UWP 'Enthusiasts' to counter balance your incessant negativity in said threads? Ying and Yang and all that
To run the game at 1080p, you'd need to make a custom resolution of 2880x1620 set the game to that in the menu. Or just use DSR if you have an Nvidia card.
Frozone
Member
I'm so sorry that people aren't able to enjoy this stellar looking game. This game is IMO the best looking game this generation on the lighting/shading alone. I'm not getting bad framerate issues as most people here which is mysterious to me (running a Titan X w/362.00 drivers). I do get the framerate hitches and stalls, but they aren't anywhere near as bad as some profess on these boards.
I hope they can at least fix that part so we can get consistent framerates. The game is truly stellar looking and I can't think of any game that matches it's lighting to date.
I hope they can at least fix that part so we can get consistent framerates. The game is truly stellar looking and I can't think of any game that matches it's lighting to date.
Pathfinder
Member
The game isn't being emulated. It's just a quick and dirty port, with minimal polish.
Guessing the 12GB of VRAM helps. I know my 970 stutters with Ultra textures and shadows on.
I'm getting framerate hitches and stalls on a Titan X, but it's not as bad as some say -- that's essentially what you are going for here?
All of those will allow you to quit the game via Alt-F4 (like practically everything on Windows ever) or clicking the X... none of those REQUIRE you to do that though. Because they include a "quit game" option on the menu screen...
The game would look fantastic if it weren't for the unfortunate IQ. Hopefully the performance gets better so it can be run at higher resolutions and still remain playable.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The sacrifice in IQ is likely due considerations made for the level of effects in the game. Anyone who has played on PC/XBONE can attest, this has got to be the most effects heavy game made in a long time, if not all time. There are so many layers of insane graphical effects being added in order to simulate the time 'stutters', for example. Remedy are good developers, they know what they are doing.
It is hands down the best looking game out right now. I've been running it on Low and it looks unbelievable. I got to see it on Ultra recently, which blew my mind.
It is hands down the best looking game out right now. I've been running it on Low and it looks unbelievable. I got to see it on Ultra recently, which blew my mind.
OnionPowder
Member
That's 3 games. Yes it's frustrating, especially when 2 out of 3 of them are from Microsoft's dedication to PC gaming. You can't judge all games based on some bad ports.
That's like saying PS4 is horrible and you need to build a gaming PC to play games at even 30FPS because AC Unity runs at sub 20FPS.
Ricerocket
Member
They literally confirm their frame times are off, there is nothing "mysterious" about it, you are getting bad inconsistent FPS compared to any other game you've played. FPS is capped at 5/6 your refresh rate, the timings are off.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
So they are sticking to the 2/3rds internal rendering resolution.
I'll give this a miss.
I'll give this a miss.
Yes. You have to change your desktop resolution in order to do it in-game.
SLI 970s gave me better performance in Witcher 3, GTAV, RotTR, and almost every other PC game I wanted to play than a Titan or 980ti. So it really depends on the game, as many have fantastic scaling while others don't. Unfortunately from now on it probably won't be worth it.
dr_rus
Member
I like the "performance on acceptable level" part the most really.
GTX 970 has 3+ times more power than Xbox One's GPU = barely manages to hit 30 fps in 1080p.
Quite. There are other engines that allow for this on consoles but then render natively on PC (some even allow both).
flaxknuckles
Member
And now I am mad I split the pre-order with a friend for the PC code. If I had known about that shitty rendering crap I wouldn't have bothered. FUCK, ok now I will stop buying UWP games I swear I'm done even if Crackdown comes until Microsoft makes it so the platform isn't so locked down. I bet someone could have fixed the rendering if the game were Win32. Goddamn I want my money back
I would imagine max detail settings on PC are pushing a lot more detail than the standard XB1 version, even looking past the much higher resolution.
dmix90
Member
Even then it will apply 4xMSAA to whatever new resolution for their magic buffers is after downsampling right? I think that will be unnecessarily costly. And god forbid them to include an option to tweak MSAA amount and other buffer resolution without downsampling( i hope i am wrong and they will allow to tweak that ).
But is this not UWP in a nutshell? Write once and bring the code to many devices? It's going to be bringing the same rendering tech across unless devs step in to re-write stuff. If they're gonna re-write stuff then they've lost one of the biggest advantages of UWP?
GHG
Gold Member
Basically this.
Even if you choose the option that will give you "native" 1080p the end result is still clouded in blur. It's actually impossible to get sharp IQ with this game at the moment.
cleveridea
Member
General Lee
Member
MultiGPU support won't be coming as long as Remedy uses the reconstruction technique that uses temporal buffering of frames, which is incompatible with AFR. It's the same reason why temporal AA solutions don't work with SLI/CF.
It's really not pushing much more detail. It's actually pretty damn depressing imo.
JigglesBunny
Banned
Still no Exclusive Full Screen, still uses the resolution reconstruction method rendering the games internal resolution at 2/3rds of it's set quality, and I still don't even have my code for pre-ordering.
I'm finishing the game on Xbox and moving forward I suppose, and I still refuse to support the UWP platform.
This is a shame too, because genuinely good titles like QB, Gears: UE and most likely Scalebound get ruined by a shitty platforn.
I'm finishing the game on Xbox and moving forward I suppose, and I still refuse to support the UWP platform.
This is a shame too, because genuinely good titles like QB, Gears: UE and most likely Scalebound get ruined by a shitty platforn.
Hellshingu
Member
Exactly. I was going to pick this game up in May after UWP added in Gsync support but now that they are keeping this rendering solution I have no desire to. It is a shame because I do want to play this game as I have enjoyed Remedy's previous offerings but I can't get behind something like this on PC.
If this game was left as a X1 only game I might have been more inclined to pick it up honestly.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
On the bright side Alan Wake for PC was absolutely top notch and you could get max detail 1080p/60fps with cheaper priced parts.
That fact gives me SOME confidence that Remedy can ultimately patch the game to acceptable levels.
That fact gives me SOME confidence that Remedy can ultimately patch the game to acceptable levels.
GHG
Gold Member
It's like being with a woman who won't ever let you see her without her makeup on.
You know she's hiding something.
OnionPowder
Member
That's what happens when you CODE TO THE METAL
Remedy is historically an excellent developer when it comes to PC versions. All of the evidence points to an incredibly rushed and/or underfunded port.
PC gaming is better off when MS isn't trying to save it.
family_guy
Member
Will it take as long as the Arkham Knight PC update?
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
yeah, it really sucks ass, because jsut when you hope they might be getting better, they get worse.
small patch and more like fucking deal with it.......dear havens that's a lot of explaining more than a lot of we plan to fix it.
Also lol at all the xbox one complaints, almost every single one is a design choice and fucking deal with it. Come on, let people turn off film grain if they want its not that fucking hard.
Also lol at all the xbox one complaints, almost every single one is a design choice and fucking deal with it. Come on, let people turn off film grain if they want its not that fucking hard.
Lister
Banned
When SLI works well you can see closer to 90% or higher improvement inf rame rates. That requires being GPU bound and a game that scales well, so deifnitley not somehting that happens in eveyr game, but in games that support SLI well, I was definitley seeing close 90% improvement over a single card at 1440p back when I was running SLI.
I do agree that the extra $350+ for a diminishing number of supported games stopped being worth it long ago, IMHO.
I hope this is some kind of sarcasm.
But DX11 multi-adapter AFR usually required Nvidia involment to get working well, so you still have THAT issue. HEnce why I think it's dead. No one will invest in taking full advantage of the SLI goodies in DX12, and less and less games will continue to support the old way of SLI (as I understand many modern effects have issues runnign in AFR SLI).
justgames7604
Member
Bandaid at best.
Coma Ecliptic
Member
Ok Remedy, FINE, I'll do the math... Let's see I want to run in 4K so...
3840 * 2160 = 8,294,400 and 2/3 = .667 so we'll just take the 8,294,400 * .667 = 5,532,364 so I'll create a custom resolution for 5,532,364 K with 33 980Ti's...
This resolution scaling they're doing with the PC version is literally the dumbest thing I've seen this year in PC gaming...
3840 * 2160 = 8,294,400 and 2/3 = .667 so we'll just take the 8,294,400 * .667 = 5,532,364 so I'll create a custom resolution for 5,532,364 K with 33 980Ti's...
This resolution scaling they're doing with the PC version is literally the dumbest thing I've seen this year in PC gaming...
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
King Gilga
Member
Gross gross gross gross gross so fucking gross.
Wouldn't even matter since only one of them would be supported.
That's because Square Enix JP hasn't released a PC game this year yet.