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

Really? I had no issues with it, and although have become less discriminating over the years, I know that both the PS3 and XB360 versions were well received on their technical merits. Even lauded. A poor comparison. Furthermore, why the shout-out to PS3 specifically when both versions were considered more or less equal? Please state the reasoning behind your post.

Of course I don't know what I'm talking about since I didn't play it on the PS3. But as you say, both versions were more or less equal, I played it on the Xbox 360 and it ran at 20fps pretty much all the time. It was jarring, but it's just how it was back then. But now Cyberpunk running at 20fps is seen as unacceptable despite it being a late gen release like GTA V was.

I played it on the PS3 about 2 months after launch, and there is now way it was running at "20fps pretty much all the time". This is a quote from the digital foundry breakdown: "The target this time is 30fps for both platforms, and it holds at that point for most areas. Overall the PS3 puts out the lower frame-rate for synchronised in-engine cut-scenes, typically by a matter of two frames-per-second and rarely much more. Curiously, the 360 version is the only one of the two to drive upwards from the 30fps target on occasion - far from being ideal, this produces a judder effect due to the frame-rate no longer operating as a multiple of the 60Hz output signal. Regardless, the readings for both consoles stick together like glue during dips below the line, with each going as low as 20fps."

You're not remembering it as it was, or well as I do. It ran well, and the comparison to CP2077 isn't a good one.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."