By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - PUGB on XB1 drops to 4fps, issues also on XB1X- Digital Foundry

Bandorr said:
ThisGuyFooks said:

The game will still be priced at 30$ for the final release.

This is from the Q&A from STEAM:

Will the game be priced differently during and after Early Access?

“The game will remain to be at the current price even after Early Access.”

Oh. Interesting.  Well I still think that is what the person meant. Even though that appears to be wrong.

I wonder how many people are buying it "now" think they will get a discount on the full version later on?

Isn't it weird to charge $30 for a "early access" version, and a full retail version?

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that final version would be $60. Im just sating if you buy the game now you get access to the full version in addition to the game preview. People are acting like this is their final product @$30.



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Around the Network
Bristow9091 said:
cmay227 said:

Was unplayable the first month. Not talking about framerate just the simple fact that it was broke.

Really? I had the game day one and managed to play fine... maybe you're mistaking just the online with the entire game? Singleplayer worked a charm, just the multiplayer that was down, and as someone that prefers singleplayer for racing games anyway, I gave zero fucks, lol :P 

If half the game didn't work, then yes... it was broken. 



Got it on PC yesterday.
All Ultra, 1440P, never once dropped below 35fps. 50-55fps was the average on my 6~ year old PC.

60fps fully locked with the old 3930K @ 4.8ghz.

This game is brutal on the CPU, it does seem to use around 8~ CPU threads, but pegs one core higher than the others... It's no wonder the consoles are struggling with this though as the 8-core Jaguar is only a fraction of the power.

I found the game itself though to be extremely ugly, even on Ultra settings, could only imagine how bad it looks on the Xbox One and Xbox One X which I might get at a later date once the shiznit is ironed out.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Bandorr said:
SvennoJ said:
Loving the double standards everywhere. If it's a major publisher or VR game that's not perfect on release, burn it at the stakes! Bet eh, early access is awesome! After all the scrutinizing over true 4K vs upscaled it's quite funny.

I wonder if the success of this (if it's going to sell as well on XBox as on PC) will influence future games. Why bother with optimization, call it early access, make it run somewhat decent on the X and cash in. It's been working for PC.

But I'm glad more people realize that graphics aren't everything. Now take the plunge and dive into VR. You won't regret it!

Which VR games are being lets say "burned at the stake"?  Wonder how No mans sky would have gone if they just called it "early access".

Early access seems to be the new "in" term that forgives all faults. As if once a game releases it won't actually get more updates.

Why release a finished product and get slammed for any problems if you can just call it "early access" and wave away all criticism.

Yeah, let's not make early access the new loot box. 



4 frames per second!?



Around the Network
Bristow9091 said:
AlfredoTurkey said:

If half the game didn't work, then yes... it was broken. 

You didn't say broken, you said "unplayable", the last I checked that means the game cannot be played.

I didn't say that at all. That was someone else lol. But I do agree with what he said. We all know that game was a clusterfuck when it launched. It was so bad, the free version was discontinued four months after it's already super delayed release. 



Can anyone still keep track on how many times the Graphics/fps vs fun argument has switched sides on the console fronts this generation?



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Porcupine_I said:
Can anyone still keep track on how many times the Graphics/fps vs fun argument has switched sides on the console fronts this generation?

Nope. But to be fair this game has both shit graphics AND shit fps on console.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

Got it on PC yesterday.
All Ultra, 1440P, never once dropped below 35fps. 50-55fps was the average on my 6~ year old PC.

60fps fully locked with the old 3930K @ 4.8ghz.

This game is brutal on the CPU, it does seem to use around 8~ CPU threads, but pegs one core higher than the others... It's no wonder the consoles are struggling with this though as the 8-core Jaguar is only a fraction of the power.

I found the game itself though to be extremely ugly, even on Ultra settings, could only imagine how bad it looks on the Xbox One and Xbox One X which I might get at a later date once the shiznit is ironed out.

Any reason why it consumes so much CPU power, beyond poor optimization?

For reference, I've never played PUBG, but from the brief pieces of trailer footage, it honestly visually looks no better than some mid tier assets flips that you see around. Completely lacks any kind of artistic direction and looks drap and dull. Add to that that they are apparently only now adding a second arena, while intending to launch the game properly next week. So it seems like it is devastatingly lacking in content as well. I just don't get it's popularity, I guess?



Porcupine_I said:
Can anyone still keep track on how many times the Graphics/fps vs fun argument has switched sides on the console fronts this generation?

I was fine with Splatoon coming out with limited content and free updates at a reduced pricepoint, because what was there was polished.

It delivered on smooth 60fps almost all the time and the art style and visual presentation was pleasing even if it wasn't technically the most advanced.

I think that is what most people are talking about when they say 'gameplay over visuals' while hitting the highest resolutions and prettiest details isn't requirement as long as the gameply is good, a balance is expected and graphics have to be at least good enough to not get in the way of gameplay either. To come back to my Splatoon example: If they had just pushed it out with their dummy 'soy-block' graphics I would NOT have been happy with the game at all.

FPS is part of gameplay though and does not sit on the graphics side of the argument.