This is true. But graphics and frame rate can make a good game, a great game.

792p 35 fps at times when in a titan?, that kinda sucks but,atleast you can shoot through the walls and break apart buildings with the physics the game is sporting.

Go ahead dumbfuck, tell me where I said 1080p is the deciding factor in whether a game is fun or not. I'd rather play Titanfall in 480p than CoD in 1080p any day.

That said, I'd still much rather play at 1080p. It's still completely embarrassing they couldn't get a fucking Source game (and the low quality assets show it, as nice as the artstyle for the textures are) running in 1080p on hardware that just released a few short months ago.

cant wait for the triple face off interested in xb1 vs 360

yeah, fuck the people who are interested in knowing the technologies behind the games they love. 

THIS. So much THIS. X1 is more than powerful to run something like this at 1080p 60fps.

If this was the best new consoles could do then we would have been better off with Wii u/PS360.

According to the article, PC's with similar specs can run this on max in 1080p 60fps. And remember, a console has optimisation advantage because of the single hardware. I think the devs got completely carried away with optimising the game for the X1.

another point is that when gameplay is on foot like COD, its 60fps. but as soon as it starts to play like Titanfall in titans, the fps drops lol.

Yeah.

I agree why isn't this game in 1080p on Xbox? I mean I don't really care about the graphics/resolution/fps of a game but this game looks last gen so it should easily be able to do 1080p on X1 right? I think MS and other devs should focus on getting games to 1080p rather than 60 fps. I'd be perfectly happy with 1080p at 30 fps than 720p at 60 fps.

Not having both upsets me. 

The curse of an old engine, that is. Really, it doesn't look outstanding in any way technically. Next time they should buy another engine or build one from the ground.