People are not focusing ENOUGH on the frame rate.
These base console frames are really bad.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Control Review Thread
- Thread starter NovumVeritas
- Start date
These base console frames are really bad.
96% of the reviews currently on Metacritic are between 7 and 9.5. Statistically, that's not 'all over the place' in the slightest.
We got this covered is literally a clickbait site for fake movie rumors
[/QUOTE]
Lol I Thought I recognized that twitter account- the nelstar15 guy is the screaming guy from the Bethesda e3 presser.
Annoying about the strange embargoes btw. Don't get why marketing/pr ever think it's a good look. Game is out in Australia so they should not be able to embargo anything...
It is hardware limitations though, if there was a way around this with software I would think they would have tried it, not everyone has a high spec PC, there are millions of people with base X1 and PS4, if the frame-rate is poor consistently on base X1 and PS4 would it really be reviewing so high.
Reviews are far better than I expected. Seems its going to review better than Quantum Break.
This gen that isn't and hasn't been the case. Just look at reviews of tentpole AAA titles recently like Days Gone (71), Anthem (65), Crackdown 3 (60) etc.
This gen that isn't and hasn't been the case. Just look at reviews of tentpole AAA titles recently like Days Gone (71), Anthem (65), Crackdown 3 (60) etc.
His review system is different and consumer focused, that's both frightening and frustrating to corporations. He doesn't ad to a games review score so they probably think of him last.
def in a few more months.
Since my 970 cant even get 30fps on 1080p, i think i'll hold off for the eventual next gen "remaster", game pass or my next gpu upgrade.
Day one patch has been live for over a week, don't think anything is planned anytime soon.
Wouldn't that be better for a publisher, no meta critic score?? I don't think there's a conspiracy against ACG, just maybe a mixup?
Maybe they want a steady feed of content dripping out over days instead of a big dump and then it's out of the news cycle?
this seems probable. He's more critical in his reviews (which is why I love his work) than many other youtubers out there. A critical voice that doesnt contribute to metacritic def sounds like someone a marketing team would like the delay as much as possible
Hmm, gotcha. It'll be a few months before I get around to it so I'll check back in then.
His reviews tend to score with a "buy, wait for a sale/deep sale, avoid"
So if they're expecting him to recommend for people to wait for a sale, which in all honesty for many it might be the case, they could try to push his review as far as they can.
Hmm, the PC performance doesn't look that great, hopefully there are settings you can turn down that's not very noticeable and make it run well at 4k. Enabling RTX is a big no unless you run it with DLSS, but at least it's implementation of DLSS is far better than many prior games (still noticeable). Since the game doesn't have HDR I guess I'll run it on my ultrawidescreen instead of 4k so it will go above 60 fps... But I won't be playing the game on pc for a year? since it is on stupid EGS.
It can't get 30 fps on max settings if you're basing this on Gamegpu's testings.
You can do just fine with a mix of medium and high if you're going for 30.
// Fake edit: ( it actually can given that the averege is 34 and the % low 28)
As someone who only played it on PC on a beefy system with a 2080 Ti, I could see the frame rate being a big obstacle if it runs that poorly as some suggest on the base consoles. RTX has a pretty big performance impact, but it felt like a joy to play for me at 40-50 FPS.
With that out of the way, I found the gameplay to be a joy and i didn't feel like it got old, mostly because it does a fairly good job at pacing encounters with the narrative. It's not perfect and I did die a few times due to it being somewhat easy to fall to your death in a tense combat encounter, the biggest annoyance being somewhat poor checkpointing that sends you back to a teleportation point(much like Castlevania).
I think Remedy has created a fun game that executes well on a ton of crazy ideas, it's absolutely beautiful and has tons of crazy visual tricks up its sleeve.
You can expect 4K/30 with significant dips in heavy scenes. Also, for whatever reason it takes forever for the map texture to load sometimes. We are talking about 10-15 seconds in certain cases. Strange issue considering you'll spend half the game looking at it since the layout can get quite confusing. Load times are long and quite frequent ( duringfast travel, death; walking between areas has a seamless load), especially if you're at a segment where you die a lot. Checkpoints are not forgiving so you'll spend a lot of time running back to the spot that you died in. It does a full reload of the session on every death.
All of these are technical problems with the game that I am sure can be addressed later. I hope that death times are sped up and more frequent checkpointing gets added in. All in all though, the game is solid and I have been enjoying my time with it.
I think a publishers tend to push the scored reviews honestly. Something with a numerical rating is probably more stand out than a buy rating imo. Anyway, if he's getting extra embargo for whatever reason, that's BS
If that criteria was ever put in place, devs would sacrifice resolution to meet that frame rate target.
How's that workable? 4 review scores, one each for each console model?
For P.C. games, do we expect reviews also for hardware clustered around the minimum specs?
Last edited:
It's been mentioned a bunch of times, around 10-15 hours depending on how much of a completionist you are.
This is sad to read. The value on the Pro is much better (£8.50 more for season pass, exclusive stuff and themes) but if it's chugging in some places on the X then it's likely the better option.
That wouldn't make sense since Eurogamer, Polygon, RockPaperShotgun, Waypoint/Vice, and other channels that don't do scores got the early embargo
r/steamgameswap or eras buy/sell/trade thread, people are selling their nvidia promo codes for dirt cheap.
I'm pretty sure most publishers would rather you gave them a 7/10 review than a 'wait for a deep sale' rating.
Fair enough. But alot you mentioned are major news sites, so to be expected
All of this sounds great but I need to upgrade my PC before I get a chance to play this. 18 fps on console ain't gonna cut it LMAO.
?? Obviously, not sure what yout point is though. How does 7 equate to a deep sale?, they had a 4 already too
I will give it a fair shake. When it comes to Game Pass. It looks good, but at $60 for an 8-10 hour game it's a hard sell.
Those averages worry me, playing in a 1070gtx (laptop) I might pick it up for ps4, if I'm gonna get stupid fps AND deal with EGS policies...
That's disappointing. And there's no options to scale back anything to net better performance?
I got the XBX version because I figured it would have better performance over the PS4, but it will remain to be seen.
No options on the One X version to 'optimze framerate,' or 'prefer high resolutions.' It is pick up and go.
By all accounts, it's longer than that. And aren't you buying Astral Chain? That's only a bit longer.