[Ryan57]

Originally Posted by Creggle

Wait what? It can't hit 30? I assumed the FPS troubles meant it couldn't hit and stay at 60 considering what developers manage to squeeze out of consoles, they sure are failing hard this generation. I remember Oblivion, Dead Rising, Gears of War etc. running beautifully and they were basically launch titles, this generation nobody is hitting 30fps, crazy! Glad I stuck to PC until this gen manages to sort itself out.

Unity demands a lot, though. A ridiculous amount of NPCs expected to be successful on consoles what strengths are the GPUs. The CPUs are weak basically and they're expecting far too much from them. Ubi' seemed to just big up the number of NPCs despite the fact they knew the CPUs aren't upto it.

Dead Rising had screen tear issues if I'm not mistaken. I don't think it ran all that well if I remember correctly. It's also worth noting that the PS3 and 360 were quite powerful at the time of their release. The 360 actually matched upto PCs back at that time. The PS3 was powerful, but was a bitch to program for. Whereas technology has advanced so much since then that these consoles are some way behind.

I think the majority of games are 30FPS this gen. At least on the PS4. I could be mistaken, though. Perhaps not consistently, but mainly 30FPS.

[Scarlett.]

28 PS4 games (not including simple indie games like FLOWer) run at 60fps, so its not a minority. To be honest, its due to some devs using the console's power for more visual effects, rather than for framerate, since console users aren't as picky about 60fps.

[Ryan57]

Not sure we'll ever see 60FPS this gen. It's much easier to market stunning graphics than a scaled back game, graphically, that runs at 60FPS.

[Scarlett.]

Definately, people who are tuned into the gaming world will know, but for the majority of people, the extra graphical effects will be more noticeable than more frames.

[Ryan57]

There's too much fuss over it anyway, imo. I understand it but I saw someone on GAF say he's not getting Bloodborne because it's only 30 FPS.

That's just OTT.

[Scarlett.]

Indeed, 60fps is a nice extra, but it's not make or break for me, lol.

[Creggle]

I think framerate is really only important on PC as you are close to the screen and mouse is much more direct and precise, so you can really feel the low frames. On console though you use a pad and are quite far away from screen, so it wouldn't be as noticeable.

Originally Posted by Ryan57

Unity demands a lot, though. A ridiculous amount of NPCs expected to be successful on consoles what strengths are the GPUs. The CPUs are weak basically and they're expecting far too much from them. Ubi' seemed to just big up the number of NPCs despite the fact they knew the CPUs aren't upto it.

Dead Rising had screen tear issues if I'm not mistaken. I don't think it ran all that well if I remember correctly. It's also worth noting that the PS3 and 360 were quite powerful at the time of their release. The 360 actually matched upto PCs back at that time. The PS3 was powerful, but was a bitch to program for. Whereas technology has advanced so much since then that these consoles are some way behind.

I think the majority of games are 30FPS this gen. At least on the PS4. I could be mistaken, though. Perhaps not consistently, but mainly 30FPS.

Aye, pretty much sums it up, these new consoles are much further behind than I'd of liked, wanted them to at least match PCs. You'd be surprised how much frames you could get from dropping a few settings like LOD distance though, which you wouldn't notice if you were far from the screen. I think 40fps is a pretty solid benchmark, not sure why everybody aims for 30-60-120-240 etc, I know it's to sync with refresh rates of televisions but consoles rarely suffer from screen tearing.

[Ryan57]

This gen I can see why they went the route they did. Despite the PS4 outselling the One, MS are still making profit. Both have from day one if I'm not mistaken.

Sony learnt the hard way. A powerful console would of been costly, like the PS3 was, and that was basically a failure for them. Sony put a shed load into the Cell last gen and it was basically a failure. They just couldn't afford it again.

Since then there's been economy troubles so another powerful, but expensive, system wouldn't of taken off.

This gen will probably return to the prior days of five years before another console releases.

[Creggle]

Or maybe we'll see upgradable systems this gen? I think it is about time they did this, and put graphical presets in console games. Nothing fiddly but 'high medium low' for each system 'type' a console has with details on the fps each preset has based on the upgrade 'tier' your console uses.

[Niall]

Why do they keep releasing an AC game like every 20 seconds though

[Ryan57]

Originally Posted by Creggle

Or maybe we'll see upgradable systems this gen? I think it is about time they did this, and put graphical presets in console games. Nothing fiddly but 'high medium low' for each system 'type' a console has with details on the fps each preset has based on the upgrade 'tier' your console uses.

It'd alienate percentages of the market. The benefits of consoles would be somewhat lost as well. When you buy consoles you're safe in the knowledge that every game you buy for it is going to run. It'd also make it unfair in terms of people not always being on level playing fields online.

Originally Posted by Niall

Why do they keep releasing an AC game like every 20 seconds though

[Scarlett.]

BBC have picked up the story o:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30040613

[Scarlett.]

Best glitch

Youtube video

[lily.]

Wait, is this really bad? I have a list of games my kids want at Christmas and this is on it.. Obviously I'm not buying all of the games on the list, so should I skip this one?

What about Black Flag? .. it is also on the list.

[Scarlett.]

Black Flag is worth it, I hear Rogue is too, Unity has some serious issues at the moment, not to mention the game has "micro"transactions (that go up to $99). Black Flag was a really fun AC game.

[Ramsay]

Black Flag was excellent. can probably get it cheap now too

[Tom4784]

I've been watching my brother play it today, it didn't seem to look as bad as it's made out to be. I'll give it a go tomorrow i think.

[Tom4784]

I got round to playing it, it's nowhere near as bad as it's being made out to be. There's only been one occasion so far when the FPS dropped severely but aside from that I've not had any problems.

[Udanax]

Yeah, it's not great but it's not as bad as being made out to be. The microtransactions are **** tho.

[LukeB]

black flag is rubbish

[Ryan57]

Lol, people aren't exaggerating. Just because the pair of you either haven't had issues as bad as others/missed issues doesn't mean others are making it out to be worse than it is.

If you're referring to the frame rate alone then lot's are having it fluctuate. The Digital Foundry video shows the frame rate often varying. There's times when it's at the low 20s and high teens. There's also the video of it on the One where the game just completely stops.

[Udanax]

Yeah the game has been going rlly slow for me for about 2 hours lol. I guess I spoke too soon.

[Ramsay]

Originally Posted by LukeB

black flag is rubbish

The second best in the series behind AC2

[Ryan57]

Originally Posted by Udanax

Yeah the game has been going rlly slow for me for about 2 hours lol. I guess I spoke to soon.

Lol, it seems so. PS4 is the worst version if you have that one.

That said, both the console versions are pathetic. Just one a bit worse than the other. Ubisoft strike again.

[Scarlett.]

PC version isn't much better either, some people are struggling to hit 60fps, with top of the range PCs.