Willing to bet framerate issues are gone by next patch.
Willing to bet framerate issues are gone by next patch.
| michael_stutzer said:
By the way your calibration picture doesn't work but I know that one, my laptop also doesn't display some of the squares. on my phone I see all the squares perfectly, its calibration is very good. |
Yup just Google black level test, there are tons of calibration pictures. Since both consoles have a browser it's easy to do it on there too.
Crushed version 'pops' more at first glance. That's the first thing you do in photo shop to make a picture 'pop', adjust the gamma, increase the contrast. You lose some detail to draw attention to the foreground subject. Sort of like depth of field with colors.
| LudicrousSpeed said: Idk, try reading? I answered the question. |
Nope you tip toed around it so you wouldnt look like a hypocrite. Saying FPS matters for one game (a 1-2 fps drop btw) but not for another (drops into the 20s) is being a hypocrite. Trying to spin the narrative with some bogus scenario about one compay manking games for two systems and the other for just one means its ok somehow is you just back peddling trying not to get caught being a hypocrite. Its annoying to say the least but its here for everyone to read, enjoy losing your credibility.
OT: PS4 ver has occasional fps drops however I played the entire campaign on Veteran and it did not effect me one bit. The MP has been very smooth with. O fps drops that I have noticed. I can not comment on the Xbox1 ver but going of DFs article you most likley should by the PS4 ver if you have both systems as I did.
2008ProchargedGT said:
OT: PS4 ver has occasional fps drops however I played the entire campaign on Veteran and it did not effect me one bit. The MP has been very smooth with. O fps drops that I have noticed. I can not comment on the Xbox1 ver but going of DFs article you most likley should by the PS4 ver if you have both systems as I did. |
Again, idk, try reading? He asked a question and I answered it. I really don't know how simpler I can make it for you.
@bold, that isn't what I said at all. I am greatly enjoying watching people twist words and struggle so mightily just to make it seem as if there is an agenda or double standard here. My comment was in regards to putting an emphasis on resolution over playability. If a company does what they can and the game still drops frames, that has nothing to do with my point. Idk what you said after the bold and I am not going to bother reading since you're not understanding from the start.
This is becoming my all time favorite chartz thread.
Lol no evidence to suggest lowering the rest for Titan fall would have fixed the issue..... Exact same can be said of ps4 and cod. It's only a few times in 1 chapter.. It's a bug. Unlike to which had spotty fps throughout. Goal posts moving much lol. Your arguments are very one sided.
| Scientificreason said: Lol no evidence to suggest lowering the rest for Titan fall would have fixed the issue..... Exact same can be said of ps4 and cod. It's only a few times in 1 chapter.. It's a bug. Unlike to which had spotty fps throughout. Goal posts moving much lol. Your arguments are very one sided. |
@bold, AW exists on Xbox One. Same game, developer, everything. Hope that helps.
As for my arguments, I prefer to think of them are consistent. I won't apologize if that bothers some people with agendas.
LudicrousSpeed said:
Again, idk, try reading? He asked a question and I answered it. I really don't know how simpler I can make it for you. @bold, that isn't what I said at all. I am greatly enjoying watching people twist words and struggle so mightily just to make it seem as if there is an agenda or double standard here. My comment was in regards to putting an emphasis on resolution over playability. If a company does what they can and the game still drops frames, that has nothing to do with my point. Idk what you said after the bold and I am not going to bother reading since you're not understanding from the start. This is becoming my all time favorite chartz thread. |
The reason this logic fails your argument is Respawn could have lowered the resolution to get higher fps. Thats a fact what we dont know is how much the resolution had to be lowered. So Respawn made a decision that the resolution was more important at that point than getting a higher fps. For all we know they would had to lower the res to 480p to achieve this, which would make there decision justified. When you make a blanket statement about how FPS is alway more important than res it backs you into a corner in situations like this where you need to spin spin spin. Just be consistent and unbiased, is it that hard?
| 2008ProchargedGT said: The reason this logic fails your argument is Respawn could have lowered the resolution to get higher fps. Thats a fact what we dont know is how much the resolution had to be lowered. So Respawn made a decision that the resolution was more important at that point than getting a higher fps. For all we know they would had to lower the res to 480p to achieve this, which would make there decision justified. When you make a blanket statement about how FPS is alway more important than res it backs you into a corner in situations like this where you need to spin spin spin. Just be consistent and unbiased, is it that hard? |
They raised the resolution from beta to retail and the frame rate was the same. So no, we don't know for a fact that lowering the resolution would have improved the frame rate. This is a recycled argument from earlier in the thread and I already debunked it.
It's nothing like AW where there is another version of the game running on a similar console with a dynamic (aka lower in some situations) resolution and the result is a better frame rate. I am simply wondering why they did not opt to use that technique on PS4, and hope it wasn't for a resolution bullet point, because that fucking sucks. But apparently this means I cannot enjoy any game that drops even half a frame and I should desire DEMAND games be lowered to 320x200 for optimal frame rates.
Or something to that effect, LOL. Hilarious.
LudicrousSpeed said:
They raised the resolution from beta to retail and the frame rate was the same. So no, we don't know for a fact that lowering the resolution would have improved the frame rate. This is a recycled argument from earlier in the thread and I already debunked it. It's nothing like AW where there is another version of the game running on a similar console with a dynamic (aka lower in some situations) resolution and the result is a better frame rate. I am simply wondering why they did not opt to use that technique on PS4, and hope it wasn't for a resolution bullet point, because that fucking sucks. But apparently this means I cannot enjoy any game that drops even half a frame and I should desire DEMAND games be lowered to 320x200 for optimal frame rates. Or something to that effect, LOL. Hilarious. |
Ok welp, you didnt debunk anything just talked in circles with your spin and hypocrisy. Your actually saying that if Respawn lowered TF resolution to 480p they would not havead a higher resolution! !!!! You have taken this way to far dude. Its ok your fav game dosent run at optimal fps its not ok for you to criticize another while giving yours a pass.
| 2008ProchargedGT said: Ok welp, you didnt debunk anything just talked in circles with your spin and hypocrisy. Your actually saying that if Respawn lowered TF resolution to 480p they would not havead a higher resolution! !!!! You have taken this way to far dude. Its ok your fav game dosent run at optimal fps its not ok for you to criticize another while giving yours a pass. |
It's cool, bro. Whatever helps you, tell yourself that. Apparently I am spinning by not making assumptions ;)
@bold - ahahaha. Still not getting it. I am not criticizing any game for resolution. Like I already said in the thread, if you make a game and do everything you can and you still have frame drops, ok, fine. Hope that helps.