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

Forums - Gaming - Digital Foundry Next-Gen Face-Off: Tomb Raider Definitive Edition

colafitte said:
kirby007 said:
colafitte said:
ethomaz said:
PS4 version looks better but runs worst than you can reach on PC... that's what the article are saying.


Is not 50-60 fps enough????, I prefer a version that looks better in 50-60 fps than a version with less advancements that runs at 60-80 fps.... I don't know why PC should be considered the best option like DF says...

because it runs above full hd?


But, but... people told me people don't see the improvements of higher resolutions, that 900p is just fine....FPS and graphics effects are the KING!!.

1 everybody lies

2 people lie

3 2560x1600 is damn sexy



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Around the Network
kowenicki said:
So definitive isn't definitive.

As expected.

If you are pixel counting fps whore... buy a PC or shut up.

Why should they shut up? Many people don't have the money for an able gaming PC, that doesn't mean the shouldn't expect a good frame rate/resolution from a next generation console.

In this case it's not even a small different, the X1 version has half the frame rate. That's not just something "pixel counting fps whores" care about, that kind of different impacts the game play as well as visuals.



kowenicki said:
CGI-Quality said:
kowenicki said:
So definitive isn't definitive.

As expected.

If you are pixel counting fps whore... buy a PC or shut up.

Or, if you want the better console experience (and already own and have beaten the PC version), but it on PS4.


Sure if you like wasting money.

I think the game buying public that have already played this, like me, should ignore these versions like the plague.

Its a piss take.

But if you want to play it simply so you can say i played the best console version having already played the best version then go ahead, dont let me stop you.  I'd rather we tell these developers where to get off by ignoring it.

?? By that token isn;t gaming a waste of money? What if I never played the game yet? Not sure what your psots have to do with anything, this is a thread about the games performance, not how people spend their money. You sound angry the analysis doesn't make your console fo choice look better.

 

You bring up PC gaming then talk about wasting money.........funny that.



Wait, now it went from "people cannot see the difference" to get a PC? Thought you cannot see the difference? The spin is making my head hurt.



kirby007 said:

But, but... people told me people don't see the improvements of higher resolutions, that 900p is just fine....FPS and graphics effects are the KING!!.

1 everybody lies

2 people lie

3 2560x1600 is damn sexy


Now, a serious question, Can a Full HD TV benefit from a game with a resolution higher than 1080p???? If not, why should i bother if the PC version can reach 1600p if my TV can't show the improvement????



Around the Network

I must agree that it is a shame that a pc 3 times as expensive as consoles doesn't run it 3 times better



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

colafitte said:
kirby007 said:

But, but... people told me people don't see the improvements of higher resolutions, that 900p is just fine....FPS and graphics effects are the KING!!.

1 everybody lies

2 people lie

3 2560x1600 is damn sexy


Now, a serious question, Can a Full HD TV benefit from a game with a resolution higher than 1080p???? If not, why should i bother if the PC version can reach 1600p if my TV can't show the improvement????

sorry that was me gloating with my new monitor

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=177098&page=1#



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Double dip whenever you want. You either want the definitive version or the original version. Telling other people to shut up and not buy something because it's a waste of money is just as funny as people fifth time dipping on a console that breaks every time.



kirby007 said:
colafitte said:
kirby007 said:

But, but... people told me people don't see the improvements of higher resolutions, that 900p is just fine....FPS and graphics effects are the KING!!.

1 everybody lies

2 people lie

3 2560x1600 is damn sexy


Now, a serious question, Can a Full HD TV benefit from a game with a resolution higher than 1080p???? If not, why should i bother if the PC version can reach 1600p if my TV can't show the improvement????

sorry that was me gloating with my new monitor

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=177098&page=1#

Ohh... OK, i'm in something similar with my new Sony Bravia W9 46'', now ps3 games looks like they're on ps4!!!



kowenicki said:
CGI-Quality said:
kowenicki said:
CGI-Quality said:
kowenicki said:
So definitive isn't definitive.

As expected.

If you are pixel counting fps whore... buy a PC or shut up.

Or, if you want the better console experience (and already own and have beaten the PC version), but it on PS4.


Sure if you like wasting money.

I think the game buying public that have already played this, like me, should ignore these versions like the plague.

Its a piss take.

But if you want to play it simply so you can say i played the best console version having already played the best version then go ahead, dont let me stop you.  I'd rather we tell these developers where to get off by ignoring it.

It's not wasting money to someone that doesn't want to spend $300+ just to enjoy the PC version - a version with missing additions at that. To me, this isn't a "piss take" (surely wasn't called that when the 360 barely topped the PS3 in these situations). Many of us want to know the differences, and I appreciate that DF exists to perform such an analysis.

Simple enough, if you have both of the next gen consoles (or will make console purchases based on better performing multiplatform titles), the version to go for is pretty clear cut. 

First bolded.  I was cleaeyl talkign about specific circumsatnces such as yours.. where you said you had played and beaten it.

Second bolded. Has nothing to do with my piss take staement.  No idea wwhat you are talkig about?  I am not saying the fact that the ps4 version is better is in dispute... not sure how it has anythignt o do woth wehat i said.  But if you want to go back and check every thread on 360 better than PS3 version, you will see I said so what, who cares, no big deal.  Shame those ps3 fans that agreed with me back then have now suddenly chenged their tunes and its now the most important evah!

Third bolded.  Yeah, I know.  So?  I refer you to my opinion on ther same subject the whole of last gen.  I'm consistent.

 

 

 

Then why are you posting in these threads and sounding angry doing it if you don't care?