It's not about doing the same thing. I'm saying if you want to play a battle royale game (as in a game that's, you know, playable) then people should stick to Fortnite until the devs clean this one up.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Digital Foundry: PUBG performs badly on Xbox One - and X
- Thread starter Mullet2000
- Start date
Yeah, on console anyway.
I prefer Fortnite over PUBG regardless, but that's just me. Less about looting, more about action.
But let's not turn this into a Fortnite vs PUBG discussion.
And it is a blast, people acting like it's 15fps the whole time. General gameplay is certainly smooth enough to enjoy it.
it's all about developer capabilities, dice could do an amazing 60fps battle royale even on base ps4/xbox one.
I won't comment on whether it's a superior experience but yes I do agree that it's incredibly well optimized on consoles and that goes a long way in enjoyment. I'm playing on the Pro with unlocked frame rate, it runs like a charm. The controls are also extremely well mapped to the controller.
I was hoping PubG on consoles would be more or less the same experience. Yes it's Early Access now, but to quote MS, this was treated as a first party title. There should have been a better product for sale day 1.
Iirc BF4 and BF1 don't run at a standard 60fps. That's the target, but they don't reach it consistently.
Tech wise there's a lot going on under the hood of the game. And it's kinda not finished so it's not even optimized completely.
Was this posted? People are able to see the Graphics Settings on Xbox when you prss "o" on a Keyboard connected to the Xbox.
OneX Settings:
Base XboxOne:
OneX Settings:
Base XboxOne:
OP
OP
Was this posted? People are able to see the Graphics Settings on Xbox when you prss "o" on a Keyboard connected to the Xbox.
OneX Settings:
Base XboxOne:
Oh wow that's wild!
No way to scroll down or adjust I guess?
What people are reporting on reddit it doesnt seem so that you can adjust this settings.
I mean the fact that it's native 4k at all says to me that it's obviously a CPU bottleneck.
They're gonna have to do some pretty serious engineering to get acceptable framerates on the jaguars.
They're gonna have to do some pretty serious engineering to get acceptable framerates on the jaguars.
Microsoft's pulled off some software miracles this gen. Here's hoping they have one left?
Yeah but that's mostly building games and engines around the system to get that target. It's much harder to take an existing framework and try to bake in a bunch of stuff to lower bandwidth requirements.
Stuff developers just take for granted on even a low end pc CPU brings the jaguars to their knees. Depending on how deep the bandwidth problems lie they may not even be able to fix it at all.
I could see them adding a few frames, I'm just not sure that parachuting sequence will ever improve.
What did BP do for the game on the test servers to optimize it? Based on feedback with that, it seems like there's a good bit of voodoo in those servers.
Was this posted? People are able to see the Graphics Settings on Xbox when you prss "o" on a Keyboard connected to the Xbox.
OneX Settings:
Base XboxOne:
So medium settings @ 4K on the X and very low @ 1080p on the OG.
I need to retire my OG soon if this is a sign of things to come. It's gonna get ugly.
Read a few post people saying its impressive X runing this at 4K, well I'm not impressed cause the game graphics aren't even top notch plus the X has a 6 tf gpu. Even the OG Xbox runing it at 1080p so the game isn't gpu bound. Surprised the game isn't holding 30 FPS on the X since Microsoft got their top notch dev team helping on the game. Thought it would be locked 30 FPS since most people were saying X could probably do 60 base on the dev tweet that was corrected.
Was this posted? People are able to see the Graphics Settings on Xbox when you prss "o" on a Keyboard connected to the Xbox.
OneX Settings:
Base XboxOne:
Now that is interesting. I wonder if this is a strong indication that it's currently a straight port job, at least on the graphics side.
The game isn't done yet. There really isn't anything more than that at the moment.
From what I understand, the CPU is the major bottleneck in PUBG compared to most games because of how many things there are to keep track of. Rendering at a higher or lower resolution may not tax the CPU any more than it already is.
Got the jump on two people with the shotgun, every time I pulled the trigger game hit 0fps and I didn't know wtf was going on. Fucking A this needs to be fixed yesterday.
And what has posted many times. Coalition only helped with controls as far as we know. Nothing with performance.
While I love the game and hope it improves. I really don't honestly know if it will and how they will do it with the CPU holding it back. Especially if they had Microsoft's specialty team come and help with the game. I know Fortnite battle Royale has a different style graphically, but from what I've played so far it has more going on in the game with the building aspect and destruction so maybe it's possible to at least get this to a locked 30 even if the graphics don't improve...
The performance isn't great but if you compare the performance of the game in April to what it is on the test server now it's vastly different.
I find it ridiculous people are suggesting that after 1 day of release into console early access the game will never improve. Give them a chance at least, it's not like dayZ here they just dump their games before they ever actually release.
I find it ridiculous people are suggesting that after 1 day of release into console early access the game will never improve. Give them a chance at least, it's not like dayZ here they just dump their games before they ever actually release.
How does this make sense when MS became the publisher earlier this year and promised a 2017 release?
https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/31...egrounds-microsoft-xbox-one-release-date-pubg
Wait, what? The controls are even worse than the performance.
Honestly, it makes me wonder what the game looked like before they received extra help.
Was watching people play this on Mixer (Xbox) yesterday, I didn't notice any problems apart from the graphics looking rough.
He's exaggerating for effect, but quite obviously it is a rushed job to be out in this state.
What a travesty, hopefully this was just a deadline issue and they can get the game running better but fuck.
4K at that performance seems like a massive waste of resources.
4K at that performance seems like a massive waste of resources.
Sure, it's not exactly "ready", but I think you underestimate the sheer amount of resources poured into even getting it to this state.
I don't underestimate the effort, but it didn't have to be released in this state when it's not ready.
Because plenty of people are looking to play the game early, throughout it's development cycle... same as the PC version.
I think they are banking on the early access aspect of it in order to sell it in this state.
I agree, though, that this shouldn't have been released yet. This is not the kind of game you want to stand next to the Xbox One X.
If it were delayed until it was much more polished, though, I doubt we would have seen it until late 2018.
Of course, that day may never even come - Ark has been around forever and still runs like hot garbage. It's horrible and now out of "early access". It's a similar open world UE4 game from a small team in that sense.
Probably just to get it playable this year.
I imagine that we should start seeing improvements in a couple of months
I'm not sure it's a rushed job. After all Microsoft send one of their teams to help with the port. It also doesn't really mater how bad the performance is in the 100 players lobby or during the drop. The poor Jaguar CPU is probably overburdened with 100 players jumping around, shooting etc. That said, drops below 20 during gameplay are a big problem.
My personal impression is that PC perfromance improved over time. I, of course, still have drops but even the 100 player lobby tends to run close to 60 fps for me now on the testserver (tried it ~2 weeks ago, 1440p maxed settings), while there was constant stutter the first time I saw the game running on a similar system at a lower resolution. Pubg will probably never run locked 30 on xbox, but I'm optimistic it will improve over time.
My personal impression is that PC perfromance improved over time. I, of course, still have drops but even the 100 player lobby tends to run close to 60 fps for me now on the testserver (tried it ~2 weeks ago, 1440p maxed settings), while there was constant stutter the first time I saw the game running on a similar system at a lower resolution. Pubg will probably never run locked 30 on xbox, but I'm optimistic it will improve over time.
You think they shouldn't do Game Preview titles?
That's a weird angle.
I guess it's down to your tolerance for that sort of thing. Constant fluctuations between 26-30 feels absolutely horrible to me - not only is it bad visually but you really feel those fluctuations in controller latency. Not to mention things dipping even lower in some key scenarios like being close to the zone edge and close range gun fights.
It just isn't fun to play for me, but admittedly I have zero novelty towards the game anymore as I've played hundreds of hours on pc. I think that novelty factor is carrying a fair few folks through it.
There's a way to do game preview that isn't scraping the barrel of playable. You're charging money for it. Not to mention the first game preview title to have no trial, but that's a different story.
"But it's game preview" is one of the weakest arguments I've seen online - MS are pushing this like their big holiday exclusive launch. There's plenty of preview titles that aren't anywhere near as rough as this.