@6t4gp: That's not entirely accurate at all, and depends on the CPU in the computer. Generally console CPU's are too weak for the system to do anything else. Most CPU when gaming on a mid-level PC don't even use over 60-70% of the cpu utilization.
Doesn't really matter if you have more running in the background, also you can optimize what runs in the background on PC as well using msconfig and services.msc.
Nowadays your xbox one probably has garbage running in the background that you can't do anything about.
I have no idea why people actually think that a console is truly optimized for gaming, its literally just a computer at this point, albeit a crappy one.
@zothan: Oh please. We've already had dx12 on the pc for quite some time now. That's yet another gimmick.
Let me be perfectly clear. This console will not run any game at 4k 60fps without the majority of the games settings needing to be compromised. Even then, the game would have to be outdated as hell. 4k at 30fps, on top of the fact that most settings will be compromised to low is more accurate, and even then expect frames to drop below 30.
@theblueatlas: It depends on the game. Some are obviously more graphically demanding than others. I'm not saying no game will run at 4k with settings needing to be compromised on it. Something like counter strike obviously, that's dated as hell though. Try Deus Ex mankind divided or any game that actually looks GOOD. It ain't gonna happen unless you want to play at 30fps, or lower.
Any pc gamer could have summed up that review. I sound like an ass saying that, but its true.
There's no way a 6 Tflop card is going to achieve 4k with other eye-candy based settings. Thus it almost defeats the purpose entirely of running 4k. You either run it at 1080p with settings cranked, compromise at 2k with some stuff turned off, some stuff on high, or you run it at 4k with everything on low, which (most of the time) actually won't even look better than 1080p with all settings maxed.
I wish they included screenshots of what the 4k scenes on low looked like compared to 1080p maxed.
This console is really a gimmick. Most pc gamers don't run games over 2k res, it's just too graphically demanding. Stick with the xbox one and/or the PS4 slim/pro. There's absolutely no reason to even attempt to play something in 4k if you have to turn everything to low in order to do so.
If they're pleased with Andromeda and think its a success, they have ridiculously low standards. Bunch of Grade-B mmo developers that can't make a proper single player game. These morons are infuriating.
Been strictly a PC gamer for years now, but even I got a PS4 in the end, the exclusives are too good. The exclusives for it this year are also looking amazing. Days gone, Death Stranding, god of war, and the last of us part 2. I really wish that exclusives wasn't an actual thing but I guess that's how these consoles survive...
This is why sequels that do new things generally fail. The developer or new developers thinks they're adding something new (like timed-missions in this case) but its just forcing the player to play the sequel that they're looking forward to in a way that they never wanted to do and never imagined.
I think developers need to ask themselves, if I put this new feature in the PREVIOUS game, would it have been better, or worse; OR, if I removed this feature from the PREVIOUS game, would it have made that game better, or worse. I think that mindset also makes sense.
For example with mass effect andromeda, the companions skill trees are tiny, there is no customization there because of how small the skill tree is, and you can't equip them with any armor or weapons so why are we going around in the nomad looking for so many damned resources for stuff? Using Solomon's example, what these new devs should have asked themselves is, if we reduced the skill trees drastically for companions, and removed the ability to equip companions with armor and weapons, would that have made mass effect 1, 2 and 3 better?
The obvious answer to that question is no. Your companions are supposed to be one of the most important features of the mass effect games and pulling a feature like that out also reduces the connection that you have to them. I have never seen ANYONE ever complain about the fact that they have to manage their companions armor/gear/skill tree, not in dragon age and not ever in mass effect. Building your companions that you want to take with you so they work well together and with your own character build is not tedious, it is a strategy mechanic. It deepens the gameplay of the game. I've never seen anyone ever say that they wanted those features changed or removed. Only added to. Same with the dialogue choices, they had plenty of feedback from inquisitions failure regarding it, and they did the exact same damn thing while at the same time removing the previous games design with paragon and renegade. Anyone who's played ME:andromeda knows their entire dialogue system gives the illusion of choice, unlike the previous games.
This is just a couple examples. If they did it because of a time-constraint then they should have delayed the game. I mean what could have possibly been a time-constraint in the first place when they had so many assets to work from? you have mass effect 1, 2 and 3 to build on , and the feedback that inquisition got. They took all that information and literally dumbed-down features or straight up removed features that made the previous games great. That isn't design-decision, that's either budget-cutting or just straight up BAD game development.
In other words, bioware montreal simply sucks. This is what happens when you give a major project to a 2nd-rate division of a company that was in charge of the previous games multiplayer aspect, while most of the devs that made the previous bioware games no longer work for the company. It should have never happened, and they should not have released the game in its current state because 5/10 or 6/10 (at best) for a mass effect game is a damned travesty. It can't be explained, the only logical conclusion is that the wrong people worked on this game. Plain and simple. RPG is clearly NOT their thing.
The video is spot on, it's simply saying what everyone else has been saying the entire time but tries to be more sophisticated about it (too sophisticated for this site, clearly).
Story sucked, writing sucked, animations sucked. Lack of meaningful choices sucked. The combat of mass effect was never the core aspect of the game. It was the story, it was the characters, it was the writing, the combat came last out of all of those elements and I would argue the previous games had better combat because you can actually control your companions.
Listen, if you really sit down and think about it, mass effect andromeda reverses the core mass effect gameplay entirely. It is literally the opposite of what made mass effect so good. Companions, managing and controlling your companions in combat, the story, writing, having the characters be believable, the heavy weight of choice. Andromeda has literally none of that. It took combat and tried to make it more fast-paced for the player when nobody gave a damn about it being more fast-paced, let me be tactical and use my companions abilities and control where they go. Let me equip them with what I want them to use as weapons. I mean god damn this game blows.
Shelledfade1's comments