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

Funny how you two see it so completely different.

Performance isn't great, Mafioso, because an 280X or an 960 are much more powerful than what's inside an XboxOne, yet they don't show that advantage. At the same time, hunter_alien, I wouldn't call it terrible either, as it's playable with a very wide range of cards.

Playable... sure. Is it well optimized? Not even close. As good as the game looks, its obviously a rushed port. In all honesty I was expecting a far better performance, after the Windows Store version fiasco. Never the less, I will probably play it later on, but I still remember playing Alan Wake on a mid-range laptop when it released on PC, back in the days, and having no issues running it on high.

It's obvious that Quantum Break's PC port hasn't been a good one, and that is shown with the fact that both the Windows Store and the Steam versions run at the same 720p upscaled to 1080p resolution that the XboxOne., and that it pales in comparison to Alan Wake's port.

But even with that, it's far from a bad PC port as the game is playable on most PCs.

Let's not forget that the table I posted is with "Very High Quality" settings and that cards like the 280X or the 770 that were mid-range and launched before the XboxOne arrived to the market can run it at a locked 30fps. Lower the details to "High" and even older/weaker cards can run it too.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.