DF: World's most powerful console struggles to run PUBG!!!

Avatar image for kingtito
#301 Posted by kingtito (9776 posts) -

@ermacness said:

@kingtito:

And yet, Sony still took E3 away from MS! The x1x is the ONLY platform you really don't need to own as of now. Yeah, it plays multiplats better than the pro, but the pc plays the SAME exact multiplats better than the x1x. However Sony have these things called exclusives that can't be played anywhere else, Nintendo, and the pc a l do have more than one of these type of games as well also. The only plat form that have only one of these delicacies is the x1. MS had a whole year to counter what the pro was, so Sony losing that battle was inevitable. All of this is passing off to me nothing more than personal glorification, and if that's the case, carry on.

BTW: the ps4 doesn't only have sales, but exclusive games as well.

If you want to believe that but it would be faaarrrrr from a fact.

It's the only platform YOU don't really need to own. If you really want to get technical, no one needs to own any console period. If you don't game on PC, and there are a lot of people that don't, and you're into MSs 1st party games AND multiplayer heavy games, then IT is a must have. Unless you're trying to say you opinion is the only one that matters to the rest of the world? Are you?

So everyone that games on the consoles also games on the PC?

If you're not into Sony's exclusives? Once again it seems as though you think YOUR opinion is the only one that matters. You need to readjust your thinking amigo.

So the X1 doesn't have ANY exclusives? How many of these exclusives make up the total library? But if a person doesn't game on a PC how many of the games the X1 shares with PC can be played on the PS4?

And aside from sales those exclusives are entirely up to the individual as far as being worth owning one over.

This last reply makes you sound like every other Sony drone around here, hiding behind PC and thinking YOUR opinion is the only one that matters.

Avatar image for drlostrib
#302 Posted by DrLostRib (4209 posts) -
Loading Video...

Avatar image for phbz
#303 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

They couldn't lock the game at 60 with a Titan. So I guess PUBG will be optimal on console by 2030

Avatar image for ermacness
#304 Posted by ermacness (7890 posts) -

@kingtito:

1st off, I'm typing this on a phone so incorrect spelling may be present seeing that auto correct can and will work against me. Me thinking that Sony had a better e3 is an opinion, however the ps4 having more higher rated exclusives is a FACT. The x1x being more powerful is a FACT. PS4 having less of it's exclusive library shared with the pc than the x1, is a FACT. The ps4 having more exclusives that you won't be able to play anywhere else than the x1, is a FACT. The x1x having more native 4k games than the pro, is a FACT. The pro costing 100 bucks less, while the underpowered x1 was either the same price as or 100 bucks more (if you got one at launch) than the more powerful ps4, is a FACT. It all boils down to personal preference at the end, but most of what I said was purely based off FACTS.

Avatar image for kingtito
#305 Posted by kingtito (9776 posts) -

@ermacness said:

@kingtito:

1st off, I'm typing this on a phone so incorrect spelling may be present seeing that auto correct can and will work against me. Me thinking that Sony had a better e3 is an opinion, however the ps4 having more higher rated exclusives is a FACT. The x1x being more powerful is a FACT. PS4 having less of it's exclusive library shared with the pc than the x1, is a FACT. The ps4 having more exclusives that you won't be able to play anywhere else than the x1, is a FACT. The x1x having more native 4k games than the pro, is a FACT. The pro costing 100 bucks less, while the underpowered x1 was either the same price as or 100 bucks more (if you got one at launch) than the more powerful ps4, is a FACT. It all boils down to personal preference at the end, but most of what I said was purely based off FACTS.

I'm no grammar Nazi amigo. I don't care how you write or spell on here

Higher rated exclusives based on opinions of reviewers. A better library still comes down to individual taste and not which has more and higher scores unless it's the metagame and since we're not playing it anymore, then it remains subjective.

Most of what you said are facts except for which has a better library and the X1 not being needed. Those aren't facts and are based entirely on the individual.

Fact - PS4 sold more than twice as many X1s
Fact - PS4 has more exclusives

Opinion - PS4 has a better game library
Opinion - X1 isn't needed <----- the entire reason posted to you in the 1st place

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#306 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@phbz said:

They couldn't lock the game at 60 with a Titan. So I guess PUBG will be optimal on console by 2030

Ultra settings on PUBG is just unplayable since the game is in beta.

On High settings I get 50-60FPS at 4K in the loading area and during gameplay its 60-70FPS average with a 1080 Ti and a i5.

The X1X is runs the game on medium with some things on low and high settings... My old GTX 1070 did a better job than that, giving me 40-50FPS on Medium at 4K.

The X1X is running on the same performance of a GTX 1060/RX 580 with a i3... Which isn't a surprise since the game is locked to 4 cores and the X1X has a 2.3GHz CPU that has a lower per core performance of even the first generation of i3's.

Personally I would have stuck the game at 1080p 60FPS on High settings for the X1X... But parity.

Avatar image for phbz
#307 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: 1080p locked 30fps on high settings would be fine. Of all games pushing for 4k on this one... I don't get it.

Still it's concerning that PUBG team is working with MS tech support and the game runs unstable as hell.

Anyway I must say I've been playing it and still having lots of fun.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#308 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (24490 posts) -

@phbz said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: 1080p locked 30fps on high settings would be fine. Of all games pushing for 4k on this one... I don't get it.

Still it's concerning that PUBG team is working with MS tech support and the game runs unstable as hell.

Anyway I must say I've been playing it and still having lots of fun.

You think that's concerning? Have you ever dealt with MS tech support? Lol Not the brightest bunch of bulbs over there.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#309 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@phbz said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: 1080p locked 30fps on high settings would be fine. Of all games pushing for 4k on this one... I don't get it.

Still it's concerning that PUBG team is working with MS tech support and the game runs unstable as hell.

Anyway I must say I've been playing it and still having lots of fun.

I have been addicted to the game since it came out. I can't stop playing it. Its just a shame that developers push settings to breaking point on consoles... Its the main reason why I hate gaming on consoles, I don't mind the controller handicap and the settings I rarely care what its running on, but man I cannot forgive poor framerates.

This game is meant to be played at 60FPS. The X1X is being handicapped by that POS Xbone hardware. The X1X is capable of playing this game at 1080 60FPS.

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#310 Posted by Random_Matt (3416 posts) -

MS are offering refunds, LOL.

Avatar image for dxmcat
#311 Posted by dxmcat (2374 posts) -

Its obvious they are pretty desperate for games.. Trying to hype up a game and release it in this state (and think that is ok) is a mistake.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#312 Posted by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

The worlds most PS Boring console runs PUBG at 0 fps. Cry Mooaaar. :P

Avatar image for phbz
#313 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: Many/most (?) PC gamers aren't running at locked 60 either. I take locked 30 over fluctuating higher FPS if you give me the choice.

Avatar image for howmakewood
#314 Posted by Howmakewood (5420 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@phbz said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: 1080p locked 30fps on high settings would be fine. Of all games pushing for 4k on this one... I don't get it.

Still it's concerning that PUBG team is working with MS tech support and the game runs unstable as hell.

Anyway I must say I've been playing it and still having lots of fun.

I have been addicted to the game since it came out. I can't stop playing it. Its just a shame that developers push settings to breaking point on consoles... Its the main reason why I hate gaming on consoles, I don't mind the controller handicap and the settings I rarely care what its running on, but man I cannot forgive poor framerates.

This game is meant to be played at 60FPS. The X1X is being handicapped by that POS Xbone hardware. The X1X is capable of playing this game at 1080 60FPS.

It's not, it could be 720p, 360p and it still wouldn't do 60

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#315 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@phbz said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: Many/most (?) PC gamers aren't running at locked 60 either. I take locked 30 over fluctuating higher FPS if you give me the choice.

Most optimise the games settings to get a playable frame rate which is dependant on what you find appealing.

I personally change the setting around in games in order to get my framerate at 40-50FPS during the demanding parts if its a MP game so it doesn't go lower. Most of the PC gamers I have known and game with regularily do the same if they have a 60Hz display... A friend of mine with a 144Hz 1440p display plays the game at medium settings at 1440p in order to get a 80-90FPS average.

The only people I have come across that play at 30FPS on PC are gamers who have no choice, as in their hardware is outdated and or console level.

You cannot look at benchmarks on PC and say PC isn't doing 60FPS... We have settings we can change. And we do... If I run PUBG on my PC at the X1X settings I would be getting 100FPS.

Avatar image for phbz
#316 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

@DragonfireXZ95: By tech support I don't mean costumer help lines, I mean hardware and software engineers that have been supporting developers for the X. Apparently Microsoft have been giving this game extra support.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#317 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@phbz: Here's what I get with X1X PUBG settings... Medium with High textures. Never drops below 60FPS... Stays in the Mid 70's low 80's.

A GTX 1060 on X1X settings will get better framerates than the X1X easy.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#318 Edited by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

I'm getting Mighty X1X MonsterBox MasterRace performance results somewhere between 1070 and 1080. Closer to a 1080, perhaps a little better.

Man this Box Rocks. :P

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#319 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@SecretPolice: Now I know you must be a mocking a Xbox fanboy... You cannot be real man.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#320 Posted by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf:

I'zzz just calls'em as I see'em. Nuttin but the Fax mam.

Mah heart goes out to those who spent thousands on a Pee Salty Sea a year or two ago and now are crying because a box for just 5 bills blows'em outta the water. Eh, live & learn.. Right? :P

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#321 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@SecretPolice said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf:

I'zzz just calls'em as I see'em. Nuttin but the Fax mam.

Mah heart goes out to those who spent thousands on a Pee Salty Sea a year or two ago and now are crying because a box for just 5 bills blows'em outta the water. Eh, live & learn.. Right? :P

Avatar image for scatteh316
#322 Posted by scatteh316 (9476 posts) -
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@phbz said:

They couldn't lock the game at 60 with a Titan. So I guess PUBG will be optimal on console by 2030

Ultra settings on PUBG is just unplayable since the game is in beta.

On High settings I get 50-60FPS at 4K in the loading area and during gameplay its 60-70FPS average with a 1080 Ti and a i5.

The X1X is runs the game on medium with some things on low and high settings... My old GTX 1070 did a better job than that, giving me 40-50FPS on Medium at 4K.

The X1X is running on the same performance of a GTX 1060/RX 580 with a i3... Which isn't a surprise since the game is locked to 4 cores and the X1X has a 2.3GHz CPU that has a lower per core performance of even the first generation of i3's.

Personally I would have stuck the game at 1080p 60FPS on High settings for the X1X... But parity.

1. Considering the RX580 has higher raw specs it should be expected that X performs around that level.

2. The game is CPU limited, dropping the resolution down from 4k to 1080p won't all of a sudden make the CPU powerful enough to hit 60fps.... that's computing 101.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#323 Edited by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@SecretPolice said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf:

I'zzz just calls'em as I see'em. Nuttin but the Fax mam.

Mah heart goes out to those who spent thousands on a Pee Salty Sea a year or two ago and now are crying because a box for just 5 bills blows'em outta the water. Eh, live & learn.. Right? :P

Lolol

:P

Avatar image for phbz
#324 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: That's a CPU issue not GPU. And of course on PC you can adjust performance according to your settings and unless you have an ancient CPU you will easily outperform the console version. Still the game runs suboptimal on PCs unless you decide to downgrade it.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#325 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@scatteh316 said:
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@phbz said:

They couldn't lock the game at 60 with a Titan. So I guess PUBG will be optimal on console by 2030

Ultra settings on PUBG is just unplayable since the game is in beta.

On High settings I get 50-60FPS at 4K in the loading area and during gameplay its 60-70FPS average with a 1080 Ti and a i5.

The X1X is runs the game on medium with some things on low and high settings... My old GTX 1070 did a better job than that, giving me 40-50FPS on Medium at 4K.

The X1X is running on the same performance of a GTX 1060/RX 580 with a i3... Which isn't a surprise since the game is locked to 4 cores and the X1X has a 2.3GHz CPU that has a lower per core performance of even the first generation of i3's.

Personally I would have stuck the game at 1080p 60FPS on High settings for the X1X... But parity.

1. Considering the RX580 has higher raw specs it should be expected that X performs around that level.

2. The game is CPU limited, dropping the resolution down from 4k to 1080p won't all of a sudden make the CPU powerful enough to hit 60fps.... that's computing 101.

Its a combination of CPU and GPU in this game. 60FPS should be achievable Medium to High settings:

Here's a i3 with a GTX 1060...

Loading Video...

That being said you are right, the game probably wouldn't be able to handle a solid 60FPS since the X1X's CPU is very poor.

AMD CPU?... What where they thinking.

Avatar image for speedfog
#326 Edited by speedfog (4965 posts) -

For all the poor and jeallous Sony fanboys,

It runs great, only bad when the match just starts with the plane after that a good steady 30 fps.

Keep on crying

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#327 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -

@phbz said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: That's a CPU issue not GPU. And of course on PC you can adjust performance according to your settings and unless you have an ancient CPU you will easily outperform the console version. Still the game runs suboptimal on PCs unless you decide to downgrade it.

Oh yeah... Its a early access game they all run at half the framerate you would expected to get. Its why I detest early access games... Ark for example is the biggest POS I have ever played in my life.

Still playable on PC with a i5 and a mid level GPU. Consoles are just a bad choice when it comes to poorly optimised games since you cannot change the settings to smooth out the performance. I cannot imagine playing PUBG for long sessions at 15-30FPS, that would frustrate the hell out of me.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#328 Posted by scatteh316 (9476 posts) -

@speedfog said:

For all the poor and jeallous Sony fanboys,

It runs great, only bad when the match just starts with the plane after that a good steady 30 fps.

Keep on crying

Maybe you should try watching the same video everyone else did....

Avatar image for Alucard_Prime
#329 Posted by Alucard_Prime (9734 posts) -

@dxmcat: This is not the first Early preview title they released, Ark was one of the first ones and ran really bad at first and got much better later on. Most of their early preview titles went to full release later on after numerous patches, so that is the expectation with this one, but even in the description they tell you the game may never release, etc.

Personally to me PUBG runs overall better than I expected on day 1, in the sense that even though it has performance issues, it was very playable for me and I had several matches without issues. Other early previous titles in the past were worse on day 1 and even those got better later on. So for me this is all within my expectations

Avatar image for speedfog
#330 Posted by speedfog (4965 posts) -

@Random_Matt said:

MS are offering refunds, LOL.

They are offering for every game at launch a refund, compare that to Sony...

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#331 Edited by Grey_Eyed_Elf (5884 posts) -
@speedfog said:

For all the poor and jeallous Sony fanboys,

It runs great, only bad when the match just starts with the plane after that a good steady 30 fps.

Keep on crying

Really only when you jump out the plane?... Hmmm

All that while looking this compared to PC medium settings...

Life gets a lot easier when you learn accept reality.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#332 Edited by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

@speedfog said:

For all the poor and jeallous Sony fanboys,

It runs great, only bad when the match just starts with the plane after that a good steady 30 fps.

Keep on crying

You can include Pee Salty Seas and silly sheep trying to pass off their low tech handheld as a console in that equation as well. My goodness the Salt is real. :P

Avatar image for Xabiss
#333 Posted by Xabiss (1970 posts) -

@speedfog said:
@Random_Matt said:

MS are offering refunds, LOL.

They are offering for every game at launch a refund, compare that to Sony...

Shhhhhhhhhhh! Dont let the fanboys know about the great features Micosoft has been adding. It will get their little panties in a wad like oh Random_Matt!

Avatar image for princessgomez92
#334 Posted by PrincessGomez92 (5453 posts) -

What an ugly mess.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a411408acdf8
#335 Edited by deactivated-5a411408acdf8 (390 posts) -

10-15 fps is more cinematic.

Seriously tho. What did they expect. PUBG is terribly optimized and CPU demanding. Xbox One S and X uses ultra low-end CPU's.

Jaguar was made for tablets and netbooks, back in 2013.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#336 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (24490 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@SecretPolice: Now I know you must be a mocking a Xbox fanboy... You cannot be real man.

I'm surprised he keeps up his shtick for as long as he does. That's some dedication there.

Avatar image for whalefish82
#337 Posted by whalefish82 (511 posts) -

Honestly, with the realistic ballistics model and general nature of the game, I don't think it would play that great even at a locked 30 FPS. Sniping must be really tough and high FPS is essential for the close fighting, where grenades are going off and players are vaulting through windows.

Avatar image for commander
#338 Posted by commander (15229 posts) -

@whalefish82 said:

Honestly, with the realistic ballistics model and general nature of the game, I don't think it would play that great even at a locked 30 FPS. Sniping must be really tough and high FPS is essential for the close fighting, where grenades are going off and players are vaulting through windows.

Well it would sure be a lot better than this. I don't understand why they don't have an xbox one x performance version. They always say how much better a gpu is than a cpu when it comes to computing tasks. Well they should have taken advantage of this to make the game run smoother. Who cares about 4k graphics if you can't even get a stable 30 fps in a multiplayer shooter.

Avatar image for phbz
#339 Posted by phbz (3619 posts) -

@commander: That would make X players to have a big advantage over base model. I'm completely OK with the 30fps and I own the X. They just REALLY have to lock it.

Avatar image for emgesp
#340 Edited by emgesp (7601 posts) -

@mastershake575 said:
@Jag85 said:

To make it run well on the X, it would need to be re-programmed and optimized for the GPU. But Christmas might already be gone by the time that happens. The X needs PUBG as a killer app for Christmas, so Microsoft rushed it.

You can only optimize it so much when the CPU is that weak. In a large open world with 100 players and tons of action, CPU is NOT something you want to skimp on. They'll patch it to make it less choppy but there not gonna perform any miracles with what they have.

Well they could drop it from Native 4K to 1440p for starters. I'm sure that would help some and yes they could always put some of the CPU workload to GPGPU programming, but that takes time to implement and optimize.

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
#341 Posted by KillzoneSnake (2397 posts) -

PUBG looks like PC master race turd graphics. Whats the point of X or PC... Uncharted 4 looks 100 times better lol

Avatar image for scatteh316
#342 Edited by scatteh316 (9476 posts) -

@emgesp said:
@mastershake575 said:
@Jag85 said:

To make it run well on the X, it would need to be re-programmed and optimized for the GPU. But Christmas might already be gone by the time that happens. The X needs PUBG as a killer app for Christmas, so Microsoft rushed it.

You can only optimize it so much when the CPU is that weak. In a large open world with 100 players and tons of action, CPU is NOT something you want to skimp on. They'll patch it to make it less choppy but there not gonna perform any miracles with what they have.

Well they could drop it from Native 4K to 1440p for starters. I'm sure that would help some and yes they could always put some of the CPU workload to GPGPU programming, but that takes time to implement and optimize.

A straight resolution drop will do nothing...... They need to do something to release more CPU cycles...... They would have to move physics to the GPU or reduce on screen objects.

Avatar image for Starshine_M2A2
#343 Edited by Starshine_M2A2 (5123 posts) -

Instead of grabbing any excuse to bash the X1X, have any of you actually considered that the issues lie with the game itself?

These performance issues don't surprise me at all. The game launched as an early access title and isn't fully optimised. The game runs like trash on PC too and that's been out for nearly a year.

These sort of arguments always amaze me - even though the console has already demonstrated its power with Forza, Assassin's Creed and Wolfenstein, an early access title is enough for them to suddenly forget all of that and write the system off completely.

To me, this thread just smacks of insecurity and all because PS4 fans simply can't swallow their pride.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#344 Posted by scatteh316 (9476 posts) -

@Starshine_M2A2 said:

Instead of grabbing any excuse to bash the X1X, have any of you actually considered it might be the issues lie with the game itself?

These performance issues don't surprise me at all. The game launched as an early access title and isn't fully optimised. The game runs like trash on PC too and that's been out for nearly a year.

These sort of arguments always amaze me - even though the console has already demonstrated its power with Forza, Assassin's Creed and Wolfenstein, an early access title is enough for them to suddenly forget all of that and write the system off completely.

To me, this thread just smacks of insecurity and all because PS4 fans simply can't swallow their pride.

Swallow what?

1. The most sales

2. The system with most new IP's in development

3.The system with the most successful new IP in years (Horizon:ZD)

4. The system with the most support?

5. The system with the most potential AAA/AAAAE games yet to come?

6. The system with the highest rated games

Avatar image for Starshine_M2A2
#345 Edited by Starshine_M2A2 (5123 posts) -

@scatteh316: Only 1 and 2 are correct and I'm fine with that. Quantity over quality and the Xbox community is infinitely more pleasant than the PS4's.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#346 Edited by SecretPolice (33817 posts) -

@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@SecretPolice: Now I know you must be a mocking a Xbox fanboy... You cannot be real man.

I'm surprised he keeps up his shtick for as long as he does. That's some dedication there.

Huh, shtick... shtick you say????? Why won't anyone take me cereal?.... Because......

Lolol :P

Avatar image for jaydan
#347 Edited by jaydan (1558 posts) -

It's too bad the one promising game with PS2 graphics is struggling to perform on the Xb1X.

What the hell is Microsoft thinking? Now is NOT the time to put a half-finished, glitchfest game as the frontrunning steed for a holiday release. NOW would have been the time to release a polished and well-received game to show off the hardware's capability.

PUBG just continues to make a joke of the Xbox brand.

Avatar image for commander
#348 Posted by commander (15229 posts) -

@KillzoneSnake said:

PUBG looks like PC master race turd graphics. Whats the point of X or PC... Uncharted 4 looks 100 times better lol

A lot of people don't buy their consoles to watch movies.

Avatar image for Xabiss
#349 Posted by Xabiss (1970 posts) -

If you all have not seen this yet:

If you go to your system setting and go to preferences, broadcast and capture, and uncheck allow broadcast and game captures you will gain a pretty good amount of performance. I did it and it made a pretty good difference on my X.

Some people believe it has something to do with the game streaming 30 seconds of video to the hard drive at all time so it is causing the game to slow down. I am sure it is a bug that will be ironed out. This game ran like shit when it was first released on computers also. They are just not getting to acceptable levels of performance, but I still read it has its issues. Just hope it is all ironed out when the game actually releases, because it is a lot of fun.

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#350 Posted by StormyJoe (7655 posts) -

@Zero_epyon said:
@StormyJoe said:

If it runs that bad on XB1X, then it probably is unplayable on PS4.

Whoa! I haven't seen you in forever! How have you been?

If PS4 drops the res, it'll perform similarly. They have very similar CPU's.

I'm good. I don't visit the forms consistently that much anymore, kinda do it in spurts!