PC & Video Games

Console Gaming General Discussion

  • Last Updated:
  • Dec 15th, 2017 1:14 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2009
6036 posts
821 upvotes
Grimsby
I beat Mario vs Rabbids finally. Fun little game but the inability to remove Mario from the party makes tactical setups pretty limited in practice. Some of the weapon effects aren't balanced very well either. Overall I would rate it as a solid 7/10 game and I think they have a lot of potential for a sequel at some point.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4844 posts
651 upvotes
calgary
I beat Shadows of War over the weekend (well sort of, I beat the third act which in essence wraps up the story) and Im surprised how much I enjoyed this one in the end. I enjoyed the first one well enough but I wasnt exactly eager to try this one for whatever reason but I was lent a copy and decided to give it a shot. The beginnings is a bit boring and it doesn't really open up till the second act but when it does there is lots of cool things you can do with this game. The systems they've built are just so much fun to toy around with, it makes the first one feel so barebones by comparison. I found most the story and sidequests to be genuinely interesting this time as well unlike the first one which I can't even recall what happened. My only complaints were regarding the difficulty (way to easy on the hardest mode which makes it difficult to exploit some of the nemesis system) and some of the story missions can be quite cookie cutter and bland but the open world is just a joy to play around in.

Also another thing to note is the loot boxes feel totally irrelevant in this, maybe they play a part in the fourth act but if I didn't know about them beforehand I probably wouldn't have even known they existed.

I jumped into Wolf 2 almost immediately after, the game seems to inherent almost all of the problems I had with the first one which is incredibly disappointing. The gun play is incredibly average, none of the weapons feel particularly good, the hit feedback is practically not existent when you are being shot, and the AI feels incredibly stupid. The above combined with the difficulty spikes make this game incredibly frustrating at times, I like playing on the harder difficulty, the stealth sections are actually enjoyably and tense this way but any time it puts you in a run of the mill shootout its far to difficult and not in a good manageable that is easy to overcome with practice and learning different strategys.

Its too bad because the rest of that game feels so well done and polished. The voice acting feels like its practically on another level.


Redmask wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 9:36 am
I beat Mario vs Rabbids finally. Fun little game but the inability to remove Mario from the party makes tactical setups pretty limited in practice. Some of the weapon effects aren't balanced very well either. Overall I would rate it as a solid 7/10 game and I think they have a lot of potential for a sequel at some point.
Im real excited to try this out.
Sr. Member
May 9, 2007
848 posts
224 upvotes
XFactor11 wrote:
Dec 1st, 2017 11:06 am
PUBG is locked to 30 frames per second across all XBox platforms at launch which is bad for an online multiplayer shooter.

This might be because it would give XBox One X owners a significant advantage over 30 fps XBox One players if they
could get the XBox One X version to run at a locked 60 fps.

Most online shooters are at least 60 frames per second on current gen consoles, except for GTA5 Online, Destiny, Ghost Recon, and The Division.
Redmask wrote:
Dec 1st, 2017 11:37 am
Interesting. I was kind of wondering how they would handle this on consoles, particularly when the base SKU owners vastly outnumber the people with premium systems.
This is really very disappointing. And this is coming from someone that has never played PUBG or owns an Xbox One X (yet). Microsoft had one mission with PUBG, to not **** it up... and they just did. Seems like a lot of base xbox owners and Ps4 zealots took to twitter and one call from Phil Spencer is all it took to cap the framerate at 30fps. Ridiculous! Could you imagine if PC developers capped framerates at 30fps just because not everyone could afford a GTX 1080? They would get laughed at.

There is a lot of misconception about 60fps. It won't give you God powers and with the recent pay to win advantage fiasco seems a lot of people are spreading false rumors like 60fps will make you run faster! Console gamers are not the brightest bulb. Also this notion that parity exists among console gamers is false. Some console gamers already benefit from higher resolution up to 4K, more stable framerates on Pro version, lower input lag, response time, internet ping, freesync, elite/scuff controllers, heck you can even use keyboard and mouse on a console. This notion that 30 vs 60fps is the one thing separating console gamers and is the hill they are willing to die on is ridiculous. We could have had PUBG at 60fps but instead of being screwed by the developers/publishers this is an instance where gamers did this to other gamers.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 23, 2004
5347 posts
1740 upvotes
Toronto
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 10:34 am
The above combined with the difficulty spikes make this game incredibly frustrating at times, I like playing on the harder difficulty, the stealth sections are actually enjoyably and tense this way but any time it puts you in a run of the mill shootout its far to difficult and not in a good manageable that is easy to overcome with practice and learning different strategys.
Some sections were very difficult even on Bring em on with a kb/m and took me a dozen retries. Playing on even harder difficult with a gamepad would probably result in more frustration than fun. I'd turn it down if you're already having a hard time enjoying the game in general
Deal Fanatic
Oct 23, 2004
5347 posts
1740 upvotes
Toronto
Bryson wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 11:28 am
This is really very disappointing. And this is coming from someone that has never played PUBG or owns an Xbox One X (yet). Microsoft had one mission with PUBG, to not **** it up... and they just did. Seems like a lot of base xbox owners and Ps4 zealots took to twitter and one call from Phil Spencer is all it took to cap the framerate at 30fps. Ridiculous! Could you imagine if PC developers capped framerates at 30fps just because not everyone could afford a GTX 1080? They would get laughed at.

There is a lot of misconception about 60fps. It won't give you God powers and with the recent pay to win advantage fiasco seems a lot of people are spreading false rumors like 60fps will make you run faster! Console gamers are not the brightest bulb. Also this notion that parity exists among console gamers is false. Some console gamers already benefit from higher resolution up to 4K, more stable framerates on Pro version, lower input lag, response time, internet ping, freesync, elite/scuff controllers, heck you can even use keyboard and mouse on a console. This notion that 30 vs 60fps is the one thing separating console gamers and is the hill they are willing to die on is ridiculous. We could have had PUBG at 60fps but instead of being screwed by the developers/publishers this is an instance where gamers did this to other gamers.
I doubt the real reason was to keep X and base X1 players on an equal playing field and it probably has more to do with the X simply not being able to run this game at a stable 60fps. The game is an unoptimzed early access mess on PC as it is. It would be completely stupid to limit it to 30fps for fair play because that almost kills the point of even buying an X over the base model. Are they going to limit every multiplayer game where the X can potentially run 60fps to 30fps just to be "fair"? That sounds so incredibly dumb
Deal Addict
Feb 21, 2013
3226 posts
644 upvotes
Toronto
How does MS handle it with Gears on consoles? Do they cap the multiplayer framerate to 30fps even for Xbox One X or PC? IIRC, regular Xbox Ones ran multiplayer at 30fps, but I'm sure the X can handle 60 especially if it's being run in performance mode.

The fact that MS is allowing cross play in Gears between console and PC means they're not very stringent about having a level playing field, so this 30fps thing might speak more about how optimized the game might be at this point in time.

Plus, now they have something saved in their back pocket so that if they are able to get PUBG to run at 60fps, they can pull that out at a later date as a separate announcement.
Last edited by M1GOmigs on Dec 4th, 2017 12:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
XBox Live: M1GO | PSN: CURRENTLY INACTIVE
Sr. Member
May 9, 2007
848 posts
224 upvotes
ReeGee wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:00 pm
I doubt the real reason was to keep X and base X1 players on an equal playing field and it probably has more to do with the X simply not being able to run this game at a stable 60fps. The game is an unoptimzed early access mess on PC as it is. It would be completely stupid to limit it to 30fps for fair play because that almost kills the point of even buying an X over the base model. Are they going to limit every multiplayer game where the X can potentially run 60fps to 30fps just to be "fair"? That sounds so incredibly dumb
Unfortunately none of the decisions taken in the gaming industry under the current meta are taken with "fair use" in mind, it all comes down to the bottom dollar. Who really knows the real reason but one day PUBG dev says it can run 60fps on the X and the next day it can't? That sounds fishy as hell. I know that PUBG is an unoptimized mess even on PC, but I'm sure they could offer an option for 1080p/60 or 4K/30 and reach those numbers on the X just like on PC. I am sure most people would take the 60fps option. Not like this game is a looker anyways.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4844 posts
651 upvotes
calgary
ReeGee wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 11:55 am

Some sections were very difficult even on Bring em on with a kb/m and took me a dozen retries. Playing on even harder difficult with a gamepad would probably result in more frustration than fun. I'd turn it down if you're already having a hard time enjoying the game in general
Its poorly balanced, the difficulty if anything is too easy during stealth sections and too hard during those shoot out sequences.

I think probably the best solution is to change the difficulty on the fly depending on the situation to avoid these frustrating sequences but if we have to do that then the developer failed at balancing the game.
ReeGee wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:00 pm

I doubt the real reason was to keep X and base X1 players on an equal playing field and it probably has more to do with the X simply not being able to run this game at a stable 60fps. The game is an unoptimzed early access mess on PC as it is. It would be completely stupid to limit it to 30fps for fair play because that almost kills the point of even buying an X over the base model. Are they going to limit every multiplayer game where the X can potentially run 60fps to 30fps just to be "fair"? That sounds so incredibly dumb
I was initially surprised when it was announced at 60FPS and not surprised to see them back track on this, I dont even think XB1X is getting an enhanced version right away (thats coming later). I agree, I don't think its for competitive reasons, my understanding is the game is already very unoptimized and CPU intensive in it's pre-release form and that XB1X has a fairly weak CPU.
M1GOmigs wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:21 pm
How does MS handle it with Gears on consoles? Do they cap the multiplayer framerate to 30fps even for Xbox One X or PC? IIRC, regular Xbox Ones ran multiplayer at 30fps, but I'm sure the X can handle 60 especially if it's being run in performance mode.
Competitive Gears runs at 60FPS even on the base XB1. Horde and campaign run at 30FPS.
Last edited by SpicYMchaggis on Dec 4th, 2017 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
Feb 21, 2013
3226 posts
644 upvotes
Toronto
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:27 pm
Competitive Gears runs at 60FPS even on the base XB1. Horde and campaign run at 30FPS.
Ah ok, I had it the other way around then.

But what about Horde then? Do the Xbox One X users get a FPS boost to Horde that's separate from base XB1?
XBox Live: M1GO | PSN: CURRENTLY INACTIVE
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4844 posts
651 upvotes
calgary
M1GOmigs wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:29 pm
Ah ok, I had it the other way around then.

But what about Horde then? Do the Xbox One X users get a FPS boost to Horde that's separate from base XB1?
Correct, but the idea here is that its non-competitive so who cares?

Horde has always been cross-play for that reason as well.
Deal Addict
Feb 21, 2013
3226 posts
644 upvotes
Toronto
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:30 pm
Correct, but the idea here is that its non-competitive so who cares?

Horde has always been cross-play for that reason as well.
I'm just trying to see what precedents have been set... I mean, the fact that m+k and controller users can play together in an unranked setting is already a good indication of how they view competitive play. It's obviously a bit different with PUBG though, especially because precision plays a bigger part in that game vs Gears, but I don't think competitive play was really what is driving their 30fps decision anyway.

The game was announced early this year without a date for a reason, and through the process, we've had info trickle out about how difficult it would be to optimize it... to the point where MS had to take a more active role in its development. So I think it's more of an issue with getting it to run consistently while meeting the "2017" deadline that they had set for themselves. I'm sure if they do manage to get it to 60fps, they wouldn't hold it back considering performance is the key reason to buy an XB1X
XBox Live: M1GO | PSN: CURRENTLY INACTIVE
Sr. Member
May 9, 2007
848 posts
224 upvotes
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:27 pm
Competitive Gears runs at 60FPS even on the base XB1. Horde and campaign run at 30FPS.
M1GOmigs wrote:
Dec 4th, 2017 12:29 pm
Ah ok, I had it the other way around then.

But what about Horde then? Do the Xbox One X users get a FPS boost to Horde that's separate from base XB1?
Gears 4 campaign and Horde mode now run at 1080p/60fps on the X along with improved textures and visual improvements if you choose performance mode. 30fps on base Xbox One.

Both X and One run at solid 60fps in competitive multiplayer but with adaptive resolutions so you will be hitting higher resolutions on the X.


https://www.polygon.com/2017/10/23/1652 ... nts-60-fps
Last edited by Bryson on Dec 4th, 2017 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 11, 2007
6052 posts
1320 upvotes
A poster on ResetEra compiled a list of XBox One X enhancements:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/xbox-o ... tails.672/

XBox One X enhancements for Gears of War 4 are listed as:

4K/60 fps for competitive multiplayer
4K/30 FPS for campaign and horde mode.
New option for 1080p 60 FPS on XBox One X for campaign mode and horde mode.
XBox One regular and S only run Gears of War campaign and horde mode at a dynamic 900p to 1080p at 30 FPS.

Gears 4. There's a 60fps option for Horde and campaign now:


UP TO 60FPS FOR ULTRA SMOOTH GAMEPLAY
We’re excited to announce Xbox One X owners will have two Preferred Rendering Options to choose from in Gears of War 4 – Visuals and Performance!

Performance

Put framerate first. For the first time ever on console, Gears of War will play at up to 60fps in 1080p in Campaign and Horde - all including higher resolution textures and some of the new enhanced graphical features available in Visuals mode.

Visuals

Push graphical fidelity to the max. This mode uses Ultra Quality Textures, a wealth of new and improved graphical features all at 4K resolution (3840x2160) thanks to the power of Xbox One X. You’ll experience the same frame rates you’ve come to expect from Gears of War 4 – 30fps for Campaign and Horde .

In both Rendering modes, Versus will run at a rock-solid 4K 60FPS (with adaptive resolution scaling).
Deal Fanatic
Feb 11, 2007
6052 posts
1320 upvotes
Anti-Abuse organizations in Australia and the UK are trying to get Detroit: Become Human either banned from sale or a part removed from the final game.

The Paris Games Week trailer shows one of the possible outcomes with an abusive single father beating his 10 year old daughter to death:

https://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/ ... cial-9News
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5055715/s ... -to-death/



Biased writing from one of the articles:
But the game's writer and director, David Cage, defended his work claiming in an interview the game is "not about domestic abuse" and instead tells a "beautiful story" that will leave players "moved".

He added it is "legitimate" for games to "explore any topic such as domestic abuse."

Violent video games have often come under fire by critics who blame them for a rise in aggressive behaviour among children.

Parents have been consistently outraged with the Grand Theft Auto series because of story lines and scenes involving prostitution, mass murder and torture.
^ Games have ratings for a reason. People under Age 17 cannot legally buy Grand Theft Auto or other M or AO rated games anyway.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 5, 2001
4974 posts
1778 upvotes
XFactor11 wrote:
Dec 5th, 2017 9:12 am
Anti-Abuse organizations in Australia and the UK are trying to get Detroit: Become Human either banned from sale or a part removed from the final game.

The Paris Games Week trailer shows one of the possible outcomes with an abusive single father beating his 10 year old daughter to death:

https://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/ ... cial-9News
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5055715/s ... -to-death/






^ Games have ratings for a reason. People under Age 17 cannot legally buy Grand Theft Auto or other M or AO rated games anyway.
I have this on pre-order for $50...excited to play it after liking Heavy Rain.

As long as you can separate a video game vs. reality - some adults can't even do that and some children can.

Top