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

Forums - Gaming - Assassins Creed Valhalla runs at 30fps on Xbox Series S

Chazore on 06 November 2020

Ubisoft is just incompetent at this point. Doesn't matter how many people they have working per game, they still manage to fuck it up for PC and consoles.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Around the Network
Angelv577 on 06 November 2020

Well it should have been expected. When you are working on so many versions (ps4,ps4 pro, xb1, xb1X, ps5, xbSX, xSS), things like this are going to happen. There is so much you can do in a limited timeframe.



Otter on 06 November 2020
DonFerrari said:
Otter said:

MS certainly cannot mandate 1440p  60fps when some games are only run at 1440p on Series X. Mandating performance targets is only fair on developers if optimising for Series S is as easy as toggling down resolution to 1080p, but as we've heard from developers not all GPU/Ram constraints are scaled by resolution and therein may lay the problem. Will have to wait on the DF analysis but this is also the second launch game to not feature parity, so inclined to think that S is requiring more work then developers care to put in. Something MS could have compensated for by only halving the GPU power and being more generous with the RAM

Demanding certain resolution or framerate would only make some games worse or skip. The devs should be the one to see what will better show their game.

For sure, it would be an easy way to turn developers away from the platform.



sales2099 on 06 November 2020

Lol who cares it’s the casual machine. Also I thought 30fps was the golden standard for certain fans?



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

DonFerrari on 06 November 2020
shikamaru317 said:
sales2099 said:
Lol who cares it’s the casual machine. Also I thought 30fps was the golden standard for certain fans?

True, the target audience for Series S does not really care about 60 fps. I can't imagine most casuals being able to tell a difference between 30 and 60 fps unless you showed them a side by side video. Heck, back when I was a casual, I didn't even really notice that KOTOR 2 had drops to like 15 fps on OG Xbox, I didn't even realize that the game had framerate issues until I watched the Xbox One X vs Xbox One vs OG Xbox backwards compat testing video for KOTOR 2. As for latency, Xbox Series S and X both have system wide technology that is designed to help reduce latency, so casuals will actually see a reduction in latency at 30 fps compared to the 30 fps last gen games they are used to. 

For my regular gaming 30fps is enough and even some drops im most areas are no issue.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
PotentHerbs on 06 November 2020

I wonder how the Series S holds up as the generation goes on.



Pemalite on 06 November 2020
chakkra said:

Yeah, the issue here is trying to force a 1440p resolution on it. It just doesn't make sense. To render a game at 1440p-60fps you would need exactly half the power than to render it at 4K-60fps, and we all know that Series S doesn't have half the power of SX. The math just doesn't add up. In fact, I am actually quite surprised that quite a few games are offering half the resolution with the same performance as the SX.

Hardware tends to have a resolution "sweet spot". It's not a linear progression like you assume.
Twice the hardware power doesn't equate to twice the resolution, bottlenecks come into play like the number of geometry units or cache size/speed.

4k is also more than twice the resolution of 1440P, it's a 125% increase.

PotentHerbs said:
I wonder how the Series S holds up as the generation goes on.

I think the Ram will be the biggest hindrance as time goes on.

Even the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 will feel memory constrained in 5-7 years time, the Series S with just 10GB will feel extremely antiquated.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

PotentHerbs on 06 November 2020
Pemalite said:
chakkra said:

Yeah, the issue here is trying to force a 1440p resolution on it. It just doesn't make sense. To render a game at 1440p-60fps you would need exactly half the power than to render it at 4K-60fps, and we all know that Series S doesn't have half the power of SX. The math just doesn't add up. In fact, I am actually quite surprised that quite a few games are offering half the resolution with the same performance as the SX.

Hardware tends to have a resolution "sweet spot". It's not a linear progression like you assume.
Twice the hardware power doesn't equate to twice the resolution, bottlenecks come into play like the number of geometry units or cache size/speed.

4k is also more than twice the resolution of 1440P, it's a 125% increase.

PotentHerbs said:
I wonder how the Series S holds up as the generation goes on.

I think the Ram will be the biggest hindrance as time goes on.

Even the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 will feel memory constrained in 5-7 years time, the Series S with just 10GB will feel extremely antiquated.

I had the same concern about the RAM when the Series S specs were revealed. Optimization for the Series S will be interesting as the generation goes on.



dane007 on 06 November 2020

Fps shouldn't matter in open world games like Ac. Oddysey was 3pfps and it was perfect. I rather open world games have 30fps and a much higher visual fidelity!



Dgc1808 on 06 November 2020

To be fair though, ubisoft sucks.



4 ≈ One