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

Chazore said:
DonFerrari said: 

Sure the busted ports shouldn't, but on this note are you saying that even the main game that is working good should be nominated because it have a shitty port or just the port shouldn't be nominated? Because although I would agree that if a game have bad versions the game as a whole shouldn't be enjoying good sales and getting prizes if they are evaluating only one version then they can say the others hold no weight on it.

When you look at the X1 version of PuB, it looks rather crap and runs like crap, but even so, the PC version isn't 100% the same either, so we could easily say that it made it's way to the awards based on how the PC version ran and how popular it was.

Look at Nier, that game was popular on PS4, yet the PC port was crap, just like how the PC version of PuB runs and looks better than the X1 version (even though I think the design is ugly as sin).

If we were to judge and enter a game based on the platform it didn't wonk out on, then we'd have to actually bother to create system category awards. Like one for Nitnendo, XB,PS multiplats. Really though, we should just make separate platform awards, since all we have are genre based awards as well as actor or writing. 

At this current time, I find it rather tilted, because I know at some point in the future, where a game that comes out to PC and then consoles, there is a chance it could be a good game and it not running so well on the other systems, then we'll be facing another "it doesn't deserve it", and it'll likely be based on how it runs, which is why I decided to talk about it recently, because I've seen this happening with ports over the years.

So it seems we agree that the game that shall be evaluated for GOTY is that version and not the other ones that may be inferior? Ok. But still while PUBG is a preview access game it doesn't make sense to name it GOTY, even if it was running very up to standard, as you said the game is ugly and even on PC still suffers on performance. Maybe the final edition will deserve to be a GOTY contender.

Zekkyou said:

DonFerrari said: 

What above standard benefits are they getting here? The game will launch at the same price people on early access are paying, most early access (alpha and betas) are free and also the testers usually are paid... So I see is customers forking money to be guinea pigs instead of they collecting any special benefits.

The disclaimer is made very broad so we can't say "well it states this, but it really is that".

Yep, still more and more people are turning digital and at some point will be a lot worse option to keep hardcopy primarily.

In general they get early (and on-going) access to a title, get to help fund its development (and often allow the final game to be larger and better polished), be a part of the community that helps shape the game's future, and sometimes get the game cheaper long-term (not applicable to PUBG, but it is to many early access titles). It's fine if you don't consider these benefits worth it, but many others do. It's also entirely fine for you to in general disapprove of early access, but again, others feel differently.

I didn't say "it really is that", i said it's likley that's the case. The alternative would be an illogical position for MS to attempt to hold in extreme situations, for both the reasons i noted.

Indeed, because those people weighed the risks and rewards of going digital and many have decided it's worth it. I agree it's a shame in many respects, but it's down to the consumer to decide how much they value the benefits.

Some of the points you listed aren't benefits to the customer but to the devs... no worry although I wouldn't pay for most early access (can't say I never would, because it could appear a game I'm very interested that I would take the chance to play it earlier). I'm just pointing concern for a disclaimer that protects the company much more than the customer.

Well let's not discuss what ifs and semantics, althought the disclaimer could have been made in a manner that doesn't seem like to totally excuse them from responsability. And sure I agree customers are free to decide even if we think it's a dumb decision. I also think it's dumb to buy year releases and certainly there are people that think it's dumb that I buy GTS and have a wheel.

AlfredoTurkey said:
DonFerrari said:

So you are generalizing from other games? Because online competition on DC is one of the various different modes in the game, so it hardly is half of the game, unless of course you are trying to flame the game. Which by the way is off-topic.

It must be fairly taxing replying to people AND attempting to dig into their brains, trying to figure out their motivation for posting comments. 

I don't own the game nor have I played it. I don't know if it's good or bad and don't care. I was simply addressing the concept that a game which ships with multiplayer being so broken that it doesn't even WORK could be considered a functional game. I don't think it is... not as a whole. Games aren't judged and reviewed mode-by-mode. They're judged and reviewed as a whole and as a whole, the game didn't function or work properly. Some of it did, some of it didn't. It was a total fuck job imo.

And this reply is something worth as a point and explain it, while the first one was just an attack and spouting lies, because as you admitted you never played it. Still it was off-topic and unecessary. And if you wanted to point examples you could use some from the same platform or several of diverse platforms.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:

So it seems we agree that the game that shall be evaluated for GOTY is that version and not the other ones that may be inferior? Ok. But still while PUBG is a preview access game it doesn't make sense to name it GOTY, even if it was running very up to standard, as you said the game is ugly and even on PC still suffers on performance. Maybe the final edition will deserve to be a GOTY contender.

I was more on about it's popularity, as PuB entered the list due to it's spiking growth in sales and general popularity, rather than it's actual levels of performance (which Nier lacked on it's PC version).

I can't see the final release being able to enter GOTY next winter, as that would mark it for one game entering GOTY twice in a row.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Chazore said:
DonFerrari said:

So it seems we agree that the game that shall be evaluated for GOTY is that version and not the other ones that may be inferior? Ok. But still while PUBG is a preview access game it doesn't make sense to name it GOTY, even if it was running very up to standard, as you said the game is ugly and even on PC still suffers on performance. Maybe the final edition will deserve to be a GOTY contender.

I was more on about it's popularity, as PuB entered the list due to it's spiking growth in sales and general popularity, rather than it's actual levels of performance (which Nier lacked on it's PC version).

I can't see the final release being able to enter GOTY next winter, as that would mark it for one game entering GOTY twice in a row.

I think I have seem ports entering GOTY lists on subsequent years.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Zekkyou said:

In general they get early (and on-going) access to a title, get to help fund its development (and often allow the final game to be larger and better polished), be a part of the community that helps shape the game's future, and sometimes get the game cheaper long-term (not applicable to PUBG, but it is to many early access titles). It's fine if you don't consider these benefits worth it, but many others do. It's also entirely fine for you to in general disapprove of early access, but again, others feel differently.

I didn't say "it really is that", i said it's likley that's the case. The alternative would be an illogical position for MS to attempt to hold in extreme situations, for both the reasons i noted.

Indeed, because those people weighed the risks and rewards of going digital and many have decided it's worth it. I agree it's a shame in many respects, but it's down to the consumer to decide how much they value the benefits.

Some of the points you listed aren't benefits to the customer but to the devs... no worry although I wouldn't pay for most early access (can't say I never would, because it could appear a game I'm very interested that I would take the chance to play it earlier). I'm just pointing concern for a disclaimer that protects the company much more than the customer.

Well let's not discuss what ifs and semantics, althought the disclaimer could have been made in a manner that doesn't seem like to totally excuse them from responsability. And sure I agree customers are free to decide even if we think it's a dumb decision. I also think it's dumb to buy year releases and certainly there are people that think it's dumb that I buy GTS and have a wheel.

Something can benefit the developer and still be a selling point to some consumers (e.g. funding development of a game that might otherwise not exist), it doesn't have to be just one or the other.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that, because i think the disclaimer is fine. It's clearly placed, and gives you a quick but defined description of the key risks. It's worth noting that at least as far as PUBG goes, i expect those risks are exceedingly unlikely. MS are publishing the game, so i'd be surprised if some sort of contract wasn't in place between MS and Bluehole.



Zekkyou said:
DonFerrari said:

Some of the points you listed aren't benefits to the customer but to the devs... no worry although I wouldn't pay for most early access (can't say I never would, because it could appear a game I'm very interested that I would take the chance to play it earlier). I'm just pointing concern for a disclaimer that protects the company much more than the customer.

Well let's not discuss what ifs and semantics, althought the disclaimer could have been made in a manner that doesn't seem like to totally excuse them from responsability. And sure I agree customers are free to decide even if we think it's a dumb decision. I also think it's dumb to buy year releases and certainly there are people that think it's dumb that I buy GTS and have a wheel.

Something can benefit the developer and still be a selling point to some consumers (e.g. funding development of a game that might otherwise not exist), it doesn't have to be just one or the other.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that, because i think the disclaimer is fine. It's clearly placed, and gives you a quick but defined description of the key risks. It's worth noting that at least as far as PUBG goes, i expect those risks are exceedingly unlikely. MS are publishing the game, so i'd be surprised if some sort of contract wasn't in place between MS and Bluehole.

No worries, sure some cases you can say that the person want to fund the game, but that isn't really a benefit to himself. Also when talking about a game that already crossed dozen Millions on PC and have MS as publisher doesn't really need extra funding.

On the second part, I agree that we don't pursue this line of though anymore as it really is quite unlikely that MS would just call quits if they can avoid, even if cases like Scalebound happened canceling PUBG wouldn't benefit MS.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
Zekkyou said:

Something can benefit the developer and still be a selling point to some consumers (e.g. funding development of a game that might otherwise not exist), it doesn't have to be just one or the other.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that, because i think the disclaimer is fine. It's clearly placed, and gives you a quick but defined description of the key risks. It's worth noting that at least as far as PUBG goes, i expect those risks are exceedingly unlikely. MS are publishing the game, so i'd be surprised if some sort of contract wasn't in place between MS and Bluehole.

No worries, sure some cases you can say that the person want to fund the game, but that isn't really a benefit to himself. Also when talking about a game that already crossed dozen Millions on PC and have MS as publisher doesn't really need extra funding.

On the second part, I agree that we don't pursue this line of though anymore as it really is quite unlikely that MS would just call quits if they can avoid, even if cases like Scalebound happened canceling PUBG wouldn't benefit MS.

Often the benefit is that the game gets the chance to be finished at all, which i expect many would consider a pretty big up side :p A lot of people consider that a big enough positive that they fund completely unreleased stuff on Kickstarter, and early access is a clear step up over that in many respects. And sure, but if something becomes as popular as PUBG it implies it's already in a state that millions consider at minimum temporarily acceptable. They have put that money to work too; the PC version has gone from early access to released in just 9 - 10 months.



Confirmed. This game runs a lot better on xbox when you disable dvr. Also, if you have the OG Xbox one hard drive, try swapping it out for something faster (which is cheap to find).

 

https://wccftech.com/pubg-xbox-performance-improve-gamedvr/

Last edited by Snoopy - on 14 December 2017

Zekkyou said:
DonFerrari said:

No worries, sure some cases you can say that the person want to fund the game, but that isn't really a benefit to himself. Also when talking about a game that already crossed dozen Millions on PC and have MS as publisher doesn't really need extra funding.

On the second part, I agree that we don't pursue this line of though anymore as it really is quite unlikely that MS would just call quits if they can avoid, even if cases like Scalebound happened canceling PUBG wouldn't benefit MS.

Often the benefit is that the game gets the chance to be finished at all, which i expect many would consider a pretty big up side :p A lot of people consider that a big enough positive that they fund completely unreleased stuff on Kickstarter, and early access is a clear step up over that in many respects. And sure, but if something becomes as popular as PUBG it implies it's already in a state that millions consider at minimum temporarily acceptable. They have put that money to work too; the PC version has gone from early access to released in just 9 - 10 months.

Fair point... and I don't mind guinea pigs as long as they are other people.

Snoopy said:

Confirmed. This game runs a lot better on xbox when you disable dvr. Also, if you have the OG Xbox one hard drive, try swapping it out for something faster (which is cheap to find).

 

https://wccftech.com/pubg-xbox-performance-improve-gamedvr/

So people are supposed to find their own work arounds over the lack of competence of the dev?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

ThisGuyFooks said:

How dare you sir!

The Xbox One X compute power is close to a GTX 1080 and its GPU Memory and Bandwidth close to Titan X Series!!!

https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-one-x-gpu-compute-power-is-close-to-gtx-1080-gpu-memory-and-bandwidth-close-to-titan-x-series-war-thunder-dev

No.

Snoopy said:

Confirmed. This game runs a lot better on xbox when you disable dvr. Also, if you have the OG Xbox one hard drive, try swapping it out for something faster (which is cheap to find).

 

https://wccftech.com/pubg-xbox-performance-improve-gamedvr/

You can't "Swap out" the hard drive.

Using any external drive that isn't a 5400rpm, 500GB~ or less platter, 2.5" hard drive is going to show marked improvements, you don't need an SSD though.



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

DonFerrari said:
Zekkyou said:

Often the benefit is that the game gets the chance to be finished at all, which i expect many would consider a pretty big up side :p A lot of people consider that a big enough positive that they fund completely unreleased stuff on Kickstarter, and early access is a clear step up over that in many respects. And sure, but if something becomes as popular as PUBG it implies it's already in a state that millions consider at minimum temporarily acceptable. They have put that money to work too; the PC version has gone from early access to released in just 9 - 10 months.

Fair point... and I don't mind guinea pigs as long as they are other people.

I'm with you there!