The Division 2: PC Tech & Xbox One X Comparison

  • 179 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#1 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3235 posts) -

XBX - Medium or lower settings
- Terrain setting lower than PC's low
- Volumetric lighting is low or medium with more aliasing than PC's low
- SSAO "very unstable" and closest match to PC's low setting
- Object detail equivalent to PC's "10" or "12"out of a possible "100"
- SSR equal to medium

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#2 Edited by lundy86_4 (53344 posts) -

That's a pretty large disparity. I know this isn't the video, but does the X hit 4K native?

I'm on the fence with the game overall, but i'm hoping a 2080 can run the game solidly at 1440p/4k. 4K is gonna be a real test though.

Edit: This does make me wonder if they are aiming for a cross-gen game. If speculation is right and we're seeing the next-gen launch this year (not likely) or next year (more likely,) ir makes me wonder if they're bridging the gap on consoles.

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#3 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3235 posts) -

@lundy86_4: Yeah, the game is native 4K on the X. Some might say there were heavy compromises made to get the game to run at a native 4K resolution. Others will rewrite the English language or pigeonhole the standards of “compromise” to the Xbox One S version only.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#4 Posted by lundy86_4 (53344 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: They should have definitely foregone the 4K native. It's not terrible looking, but it definitely doesn't look all that good either. I feel they likely went with a dynamic resolution on Pro to match the X settings, or at least come close.

Avatar image for with_teeth26
#5 Edited by with_teeth26 (9545 posts) -

I don't think console-only gamers realise how much better Ubi games look on PC these days.

they are some of the best looking games out there, period. even more impressive is they have multiple engines and all of them run really well on PC.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#6 Edited by lundy86_4 (53344 posts) -

@with_teeth26: Exactly. The Division released 3 years ago, and I booted it up for around 15 hrs of gameplay over the last few weeks, and it holds up tremendously (I max the game apart from the ridiculous Nvidia shadow tax.)

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
#7 Posted by Zero_epyon (13287 posts) -

That and it's locked at 30 on all consoles. These consoles are aging very quickly, but the X has the least excuse of all since it's newer hardware.

Avatar image for true_link
#8 Posted by True_Link (243 posts) -

How does it look on ps4?

Avatar image for Alucard_Prime
#9 Edited by Alucard_Prime (10107 posts) -

Heh, whatever floats your boat, you could not attack the framerate so you went elsewhere I see. I cannot fathom an X owner complaining about how this game looks, to me it is one of the better looking X-Enhanced games yet and it is not a case of "4K native at any cost".

It's has an amazing lighting engine, HDR support, very detailed and sharp textures. It's one of the best looking games I've seen on the X and on their previous video DF implied in the written article how the X is likely not even used at max power. It's an overall good upgrade over the last game and I personally have no complaints about it, it's a showcase title on the X as far as I'm concerned but I should mention that I have it installed on an SSD drive, not sure how much that affects the texture loading but for me there are no issues.

"Xbox One X is obviously getting a great deal with its native 4K, but performance wise it's no slouch either - 30fps locked in every place I've tested. Given it's rarely engaging dynamic res so far (if at all), it does suggest it's not being pushed beyond its limits here."

Avatar image for davillain-
#10 Edited by DaVillain- (36879 posts) -

@Zero_epyon said:

That and it's locked at 30 on all consoles. These consoles are aging very quickly, but the X has the least excuse of all since it's newer hardware.

No kidding. This gen is aging way faster then it did last-gen.

On topic: I currently playing Division 2, it runs so damn good in 1440p, but 4K totally blows it when playing it on PC. So Xbox One X is running medium to low settings, but but it’s 4K.

Avatar image for tormentos
#11 Posted by tormentos (29187 posts) -

@goldenelementxl:

Waiting for the rewriting squad.

Avatar image for BassMan
#12 Edited by BassMan (10361 posts) -

X1X "Premium product" "Most powerful console" "Power of the cloud"...

Avatar image for fedor
#13 Posted by Fedor (5139 posts) -

@Alucard_Prime: Lol 30fps/low settings.

Avatar image for ermacness
#14 Posted by ermacness (8119 posts) -

@true_link:

It's funny that people ask about the pro version even though it's the "obvious" weaker console, in comparison like these, but turn around and get rustled when we bring up the x1(the obviously most unappealing console in that country) in a Japan sales thread when the topic is the switch vs the ps4.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#15 Edited by ronvalencia (28052 posts) -

@goldenelementxl:

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/software/the_division_2_pc_performance_review/11

For Ultra settings at 4K, Vega 56 is the minimum GPU card. 40 fps and above are in my 4K monitor's FreeSync range.

Avatar image for BassMan
#16 Edited by BassMan (10361 posts) -

@ronvalencia: Looks like 2080 Ti isn't even good enough for 4K Ultra. An average fps of 61.51 is not good. You don't want to be dipping below 60fps unless you have a G-Sync or FreeSync screen to compensate. I would lower some settings to get a stable 60fps.

Avatar image for Gatygun
#17 Posted by Gatygun (1520 posts) -

Ultra is a fools game tho only there to sell hardware, test it at high settings the only setting that matters.

Avatar image for BassMan
#18 Edited by BassMan (10361 posts) -

@Gatygun said:

Ultra is a fools game tho only there to sell hardware, test it at high settings the only setting that matters.

I always start at Ultra and lower individual settings if necessary to achieve a minimum of 60fps. If I am having to lower settings too much, I will just play at a lower resolution.

Avatar image for raining51
#19 Posted by Raining51 (1124 posts) -

That's honstly not a very accurate rundown but it's not the worst ever...

It really depends on a number of ffactors that aren't really apparent here or part of the bigger equation, so basically I think it could vary based on a few factors and then I'd basically agree with the content present here.

Avatar image for warmblur
#20 Edited by warmblur (2508 posts) -

The original Division before the downgrade still looks miles better next gen can't come soon enough.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#21 Posted by ronvalencia (28052 posts) -

@BassMan said:

@ronvalencia: Looks like 2080 Ti isn't even good enough for 4K Ultra. An average fps of 61.51 is not good. You don't want to be dipping below 60fps unless you have a G-Sync or FreeSync screen to compensate. I would lower some settings to get a stable 60fps.

I have 32 inch FreeSync 4K HDR LG monitor and MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti GX TRIO is already factory OC at 1755 MHz which is faster than FE model e.g. https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_RTX_2080_Ti_Gaming_X_Trio/27.html

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_RTX_2080_Ti_AMP/

Avatar image for drserigala
#22 Posted by DrSerigala (109 posts) -

lower than lowest setting.

LOL

Avatar image for enzyme36
#23 Posted by enzyme36 (4214 posts) -

Game is gorgeous!! Absolutely stunning...

One of the first games I've bought that really showcases my new 2k monitor.

Avatar image for jahnee
#24 Posted by jahnee (3989 posts) -

what is the general impression of this game? I am looking for a tps tactical military shooter, this would fit that ballpark?

Avatar image for jahnee
#25 Edited by jahnee (3989 posts) -

Rage 2 on the other hand will run 1080p 60fps on both the PRO and Xbox one X, without a 4k mode present https://www.vg247.com/2019/03/18/rage-2-1080p-60fps-ps4-pro-xbox-one-x/

Looks like Microsoft isn't restricting anyone to a 4k agenda at all.

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
#26 Posted by Zero_epyon (13287 posts) -
@jahnee said:

Rage 2 on the other hand will run 1080p 60fps on both the PRO and Xbox one X, without a 4k mode present https://www.vg247.com/2019/03/18/rage-2-1080p-60fps-ps4-pro-xbox-one-x/

Looks like Microsoft isn't restricting anyone to a 4k agenda at all.

No they aren't and both Sony and MS have been upfront about that from the beginning.

Avatar image for NoodleFighter
#27 Posted by NoodleFighter (10319 posts) -
@lundy86_4 said:

@with_teeth26: Exactly. The Division released 3 years ago, and I booted it up for around 15 hrs of gameplay over the last few weeks, and it holds up tremendously (I max the game apart from the ridiculous Nvidia shadow tax.)

I got The Division in Feburary's humble bundle pack, is it worth playing? I feel that now is a bad time with the sequel with lots of people likely jumping ship to that one.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#28 Posted by mrbojangles25 (44044 posts) -

@with_teeth26 said:

I don't think console-only gamers realise how much better Ubi games look on PC these days.

they are some of the best looking games out there, period. even more impressive is they have multiple engines and all of them run really well on PC.

Yeah, the whole multiple engines things is what really impresses me.

Far Cry: New Dawn might be a tried, stale game, but its fun enough and damn if it doesn't look pretty, that's the Dunia engine iirc. This is on my Geforce 980 btw, a 5+ year old card

Next there is AC: Odyssey (uses the AnvilNext engine) which is pretty damn impressive given it's scale:

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

I guess GR: Wildlands used the AnvilNext engine as well

And let's go back to AC Unity which, imo, is still one of the better looking games out there given it's age, attention to detail, and overall appearance. Look at the detail on the goldleaf of the buildings! And Paris and so on.

Avatar image for with_teeth26
#29 Posted by with_teeth26 (9545 posts) -
@NoodleFighter said:
@lundy86_4 said:

@with_teeth26: Exactly. The Division released 3 years ago, and I booted it up for around 15 hrs of gameplay over the last few weeks, and it holds up tremendously (I max the game apart from the ridiculous Nvidia shadow tax.)

I got The Division in Feburary's humble bundle pack, is it worth playing? I feel that now is a bad time with the sequel with lots of people likely jumping ship to that one.

if you can find a friend to play through it with then it'd be worth it easily

going through the entire thing solo you might get bored eventually... unsure if you'd be able to find people in matchmaking for the first one at this point. there are less than 2k people playing it on Steam (though you don't need steam for it, so the real number will be higher), and I imagine most people still playing are doing end-game stuff anyways.

its worth trying just to run around the city, game still looks really good

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#30 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25360 posts) -
@NoodleFighter said:
@lundy86_4 said:

@with_teeth26: Exactly. The Division released 3 years ago, and I booted it up for around 15 hrs of gameplay over the last few weeks, and it holds up tremendously (I max the game apart from the ridiculous Nvidia shadow tax.)

I got The Division in Feburary's humble bundle pack, is it worth playing? I feel that now is a bad time with the sequel with lots of people likely jumping ship to that one.

The Division 2 is better in every way, from what I've played. But, I only played both games for a couple hours so far.

Avatar image for Antwan3K
#31 Edited by Antwan3K (4400 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: Off Topic: again, find me a quote where Microsoft says the Xbox One X will match the latest and greatest that PC has to offer and thar it will do so Forever.. Because short of that, your "rewrite of the English language" means exactly that... That Microsoft said that there would be no compromises in comparison to anything PC has to offer (and technically, anything PC will EVER have to offer if you want to stick to your insane ideal of "no compromise")..

Meanwhile, there are direct quotes from Microsoft stating that the design goal of the Xbox One X was to provide 4-times the resolution of base hardware without having to sacrifice performance.. A design goal that has by-and-large been met..

The fact that you are here, once again creating another thread to downplay a game that actually hits NATIVE 4K on the Xbox One X simply because it doesn't match up to everything possible on PC is a clear sign of your continuous butthurt on this topic..

I mean, when did Microsoft (or hell, when did any Xbox fan on this forum) state that the Xbox One X will be a match for anything and everything possible on the PC platform?.. Answer that question and maybe a conversion can be had beyond your butthurt, damage control, and goal post moving..

On topic: another good showing for the X.. I enjoyed the first game but the bugs and exploits killed it for me eventually.. It seems that early impressions indicate that the devs have improved on all the complaints.. And hitting 4K on the X is a nice addition to what looks like a solid follow-up in the series..

Avatar image for NoodleFighter
#32 Posted by NoodleFighter (10319 posts) -

@DragonfireXZ95: @with_teeth26: Well I already synced it to my Uplay account so I might as well play it. I hope the player count is a lot higher than what Steam is showing.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#33 Posted by I_P_Daily (12018 posts) -

So is the PRO version that bad that the OP doesn't want to compare them or does the OP still have a stick stuck up his arse over the X?

I'm going with the latter.

Avatar image for freedomfreak
#34 Edited by freedomfreak (51198 posts) -

Ubisoft games can look like garbage on consoles.

Avatar image for babyjoker1221
#35 Posted by babyjoker1221 (1304 posts) -

@i_p_daily: Both perhaps?

Avatar image for Litchie
#36 Posted by Litchie (24021 posts) -

30 fps, low settings. Fun.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#37 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (6453 posts) -

Not surprising at all... The X1X GPU lands between the RX 580 and GTX 1070 and that just isn't enough for 4K with the majority of games.

Next generation we will have a GPU that will be on par to a Vega 56/64 that will be enough to do 4K/30 with the majority of demanding games and the less demanding ones should be fine with 4K/60, that said consoles are always biting more than they can chew even the target power of next gen is not 4K standard for me as someone who owned a GTX 1080 Ti and now has a RTX 2070 4K is no where near ready to be dominated let alone a console with 12TFLOPs unless you don't mind 30FPS.

1440/60 on Ultra settings is what the next consoles should target if they care about gamer's but they don't they care about sales and 4K sells... Framerate doesn't.

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#38 Edited by GoldenElementXL (3235 posts) -

@Antwan3K: I never claimed the X would match everything on PC settings wise. But for you to downplay the fact that the X is running settings BELOW the LOWEST settings on PC is criminal. You think I’m downplaying the fact the game is native 4K, while I think you’re downplaying the compromises to visual quality required to get the game to run at that resolution.

If the games were running at medium, or something respectable like that, you would have a point. But the fact that you can’t turn down the PC settings enough to match the X version is wild.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#39 Posted by I_P_Daily (12018 posts) -

@babyjoker1221 said:

@i_p_daily: Both perhaps?

I just don't get it as he has a stick up his arse over the X, and yet he bought 3 of them. I think the OP needs to see an engineer that can help him build a bridge and get over it lol.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#40 Edited by SecretPolice (35326 posts) -

Look, I'm not showing favoritism so don't the rest of you get mad but TC, is a special Case and I feel like I owe it to'em to provide free of charge, a Hole Case...

Lord knows she needs it. lolol :P

Avatar image for Juub1990
#41 Posted by Juub1990 (8630 posts) -
@i_p_daily said:

So is the PRO version that bad that the OP doesn't want to compare them or does the OP still have a stick stuck up his arse over the X?

I'm going with the latter.

The Pro is simply a worse version of the Xbox One X. Why bother with it? Better go with the best console version to save time.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#42 Edited by ronvalencia (28052 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

Not surprising at all... The X1X GPU lands between the RX 580 and GTX 1070 and that just isn't enough for 4K with the majority of games.

Next generation we will have a GPU that will be on par to a Vega 56/64 that will be enough to do 4K/30 with the majority of demanding games and the less demanding ones should be fine with 4K/60, that said consoles are always biting more than they can chew even the target power of next gen is not 4K standard for me as someone who owned a GTX 1080 Ti and now has a RTX 2070 4K is no where near ready to be dominated let alone a console with 12TFLOPs unless you don't mind 30FPS.

1440/60 on Ultra settings is what the next consoles should target if they care about gamer's but they don't they care about sales and 4K sells... Framerate doesn't.

1. Until DirectML is relesed, current PC games are not universally using advance advance features in Vega 56/64, VII, incoming NAVI and current Turing.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/gaming-with-windows-ml/

Metacommands feature allows DirectML to perform better than hand-written compute shaders!

Metacommands should be familiar to game console style hardware access.

Loading Video...

Microsoft defines API standard to "real" direct access to hardware features with DirectML Metacommands.

Microsoft effectively changing PC's DirectX12 ecosystem into another Xbox with real direct hardware access, the way meant to be as envisioned by Bill Gates i.e. console DirectX API improvements being porting into PC's DirectX.

------------------

2. Variable Rate Shading (VSR) in Navi and Turing. Unknown if VII can support Variable Rate Shading (VSR)

https://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/128588-microsoft-adds-variable-rate-shading-support-directx-12/

Another interesting thing about the VRS support in DX12 is that there are two tiers of hardware with VRS support. Tier 1 and Tier 2 currently equate to 'most DX12 compatible hardware' and 'Nvidia Turing GPUs', respectively. As mentioned above there are rumours that AMD will have Tier 2 GPUs in the coming months, and Microsoft says Intel is experimenting with VRS in prototype Gen11 hardware due out later this year.

Developer Fireaxis has already tweaked its Civilization game demo to work with VRS in DX12. You can see various VRS 4K screenshots from this demo on the Microsoft Developer's Blog post. Civilization's frame rate went up between 14 and 20 per cent thanks to VRS support in DX12.

PC GPU's hardware feature sets are evolving.

Avatar image for Antwan3K
#43 Edited by Antwan3K (4400 posts) -

@goldenelementxl said:

@Antwan3K: I never claimed the X would match everything on PC settings wise. But for you to downplay the fact that the X is running settings BELOW the LOWEST settings on PC is criminal. You think I’m downplaying the fact the game is native 4K, while I think you’re downplaying the compromises to visual quality required to get the game to run at that resolution.

If the games were running at medium, or something respectable like that, you would have a point. But the fact that you can’t turn down the PC settings enough to match the X version is wild.

Dude, I don't care what the Xbox One X is doing in comparison to the PC.. THAT'S the part you're apparently confused about.. i'm primarily a console gamer, not a core PC gamer, and I will likely never own a PC gaming rig that outperforms my Xbox console(s)..

So the only thing that matters to me and most other Xbox console gamers is that the games look and perform best on our CONSOLE of choice.. you're the only one continually trying to make comparisons to the PC because you know it's a contest any console can never win.. "The PC has the best version" is a forgone conclusion when you have an open platform that can support literally any combination of hardware available, no matter the cost..

And again, why are you so intent on comparing the Xbox One X to PC when no one at Microsoft intended for the Xbox One X to be a PC competitor?.. they simply wanted to present "the world's most powerful console" and they have delivered.. look at these quotes:

“Like, I want Scorpio to be at a console price-point, I’m not trying to go and compete with a high-end rig.” - Phil Spencer

https://wccftech.com/scorpio-isnt-trying-compete-high-end/

He has made it very clear that this upcoming console will not be competing against the PC. [..] it seems like Microsoft is more sensible and knows that the console platform will remain a step or two behind the PC no matter what they do.” - Talha Amjad, interview with Phil Spencer

http://techfrag.com/2016/12/08/project-scorpio-2/

“If you said to me, ‘could you or another console manufacturer design a $2,000 console that ran, like, two Titan Xs SLI-d together?’ Then yeah, we could do it. But the console price points aren’t there. If you’re willing to spend a couple of grand building up an i7-based machine with umpteen terabytes of RAM, you can go do that on a PC.

But I actually feel with Scorpio we’ve been able to hit a really nice price/performance ratio” – Phil Spencer

https://winbuzzer.com/2017/04/27/xbox-chief-phil-spencer-project-scorpio-can-attract-developers-xbox-one-users-xcxwbn/

I usually don’t do this, but for this one I will specifically talk about Sony. I think they’ve come out and said PC is their competition. And I just don’t look at it that way. I know that some of our best Xbox customers also play games on the PC." – Phil Spencer

https://www.xboxenthusiast.com/2016/10/03/phil-spencer-pc-and-project-scorpio-are-not-competitors/

But we’ve said very clearly that it’s up to the developers how they want to take advantage of that power. Some developers focus on effects, some on frame rate some on resolution – it’s up to them what they want to do.” - Albert Penello

https://www.xboxenthusiast.com/2016/10/04/microsoft-developers-will-decide-how-to-use-project-scorpios-power/

the list goes on and on and on.. They were very clear that this console is not meant to be competing with PC and they were very clear that it's up to the developers to do what they want to do with the hardware, meaning that "results may vary"..

When did they say you can expect all Xbox One X games to match everything that's possible on PC?.. When did they say the Xbox One X is even a PC competitor?.. Unless, they've said either of those things, your entire point is moot..

I mean, look at your OP dude.. every single word of it is an attempt to downplay the Xbox One X version in comparison to PC.. but why do that when no one said the Xbox One X was going to match what's possible on PC and no one expects the Xbox One X to match whats possible on PC?..

Regardless of what you think, Microsoft intended for this console to be compared to it's base version (the Xbox One S) and to it's direct competition (the PS4 Pro) in terms of gauging how impressive or lackluster any given Xbox One X Enhanced game is looking and performing.. At this point, you and a few other PlayStation fans are the only ones trying to shoehorn PC into the conversation and your motives are about as transparent as you are..

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#44 Posted by SecretPolice (35326 posts) -

@Antwan3K said:
@goldenelementxl said:

@Antwan3K: I never claimed the X would match everything on PC settings wise. But for you to downplay the fact that the X is running settings BELOW the LOWEST settings on PC is criminal. You think I’m downplaying the fact the game is native 4K, while I think you’re downplaying the compromises to visual quality required to get the game to run at that resolution.

If the games were running at medium, or something respectable like that, you would have a point. But the fact that you can’t turn down the PC settings enough to match the X version is wild.

Dude, I don't care what the Xbox One X is doing in comparison to the PC.. THAT'S the part you're apparently confused about.. i'm primarily a console gamer, not a core PC gamer, and I will likely never own a PC gaming rig that outperforms my Xbox console(s)..

So the only thing that matters to me and most other Xbox console gamers is that the games look and perform best on our CONSOLE of choice.. you're the only one continually trying to make comparisons to the PC because you know it's a contest any console can never win.. "The PC has the best version" is a forgone conclusion when you have an open platform that can support literally combination of hardware available, no matter the cost..

And again, why are you so intent on comparing the Xbox One X to PC when no one at Microsoft intended for the Xbox One X to be a PC competitor?.. they simply wanted to present "the world's most powerful console" and they have delivered.. look at these quotes:

“Like, I want Scorpio to be at a console price-point, I’m not trying to go and compete with a high-end rig.” - Phil Spencer

https://wccftech.com/scorpio-isnt-trying-compete-high-end/

He has made it very clear that this upcoming console will not be competing against the PC. [..] it seems like Microsoft is more sensible and knows that the console platform will remain a step or two behind the PC no matter what they do.” - Talha Amjad, interview with Phil Spencer

http://techfrag.com/2016/12/08/project-scorpio-2/

“If you said to me, ‘could you or another console manufacturer design a $2,000 console that ran, like, two Titan Xs SLI-d together?’ Then yeah, we could do it. But the console price points aren’t there. If you’re willing to spend a couple of grand building up an i7-based machine with umpteen terabytes of RAM, you can go do that on a PC.

But I actually feel with Scorpio we’ve been able to hit a really nice price/performance ratio” – Phil Spencer

https://winbuzzer.com/2017/04/27/xbox-chief-phil-spencer-project-scorpio-can-attract-developers-xbox-one-users-xcxwbn/

I usually don’t do this, but for this one I will specifically talk about Sony. I think they’ve come out and said PC is their competition. And I just don’t look at it that way. I know that some of our best Xbox customers also play games on the PC." – Phil Spencer

https://www.xboxenthusiast.com/2016/10/03/phil-spencer-pc-and-project-scorpio-are-not-competitors/

But we’ve said very clearly that it’s up to the developers how they want to take advantage of that power. Some developers focus on effects, some on frame rate some on resolution – it’s up to them what they want to do.” - Albert Penello

https://www.xboxenthusiast.com/2016/10/04/microsoft-developers-will-decide-how-to-use-project-scorpios-power/

the list goes on and on and on.. They were very clear that this console is not meant to be competing PC and they were very clear that it's up to the developers to do what they want to do with the hardware, meaning that "results may vary"..

When did they say you can expect all Xbox One X games to match everything that's possible on PC?.. When did they say the Xbox One X is even a PC competitor?.. Unless, they've said either of those things, your entire point is moot..

I mean, look at your OP dude.. every single word of it is an attempt to downplay the Xbox One X version in comparison to PC.. but why do that when no onesaid the Xbox One X was going to match what's possible on PC and no one expects the Xbox One X to match whats possible on PC?..

Regardless of what you think, Microsoft intended for this console to be compared to it's base version (the Xbox One S) and to it's direct competition (the PS4 Pro) in terms of gauging how impressive or lackluster any given Xbox One X Enhanced game is looking and performing.. At this point, you and a few other PlayStation fans the only ones trying to shoehorn PC into the conversation and your motives are about as transparent as you are..

/thread.... once again.

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
#45 Posted by tdkmillsy (3133 posts) -

Would be great to see a lower resolution and higher features, but still the best console version you can play.

Maybe the CPU is holding some of those features back so they went for 4k instead.

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#46 Posted by StormyJoe (7799 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: Where's the PS4 comparison?

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#47 Edited by GoldenElementXL (3235 posts) -
@Antwan3K said:

Dude, I don't care what the Xbox One X is doing in comparison to the PC.. THAT'S the part you're apparently confused about.. i'm primarily a console gamer, not a core PC gamer, and I will likely never own a PC gaming rig that outperforms my Xbox console(s)..

That's unfortunate for you. Why limit your experience to what a developer decides is best for you?

@Antwan3K said:

But we’ve said very clearly that it’s up to the developers how they want to take advantage of that power. Some developers focus on effects, some on frame rate some on resolution – it’s up to them what they want to do.” - Albert Penello

https://www.xboxenthusiast.com/2016/10/04/microsoft-developers-will-decide-how-to-use-project-scorpios-power/

Some focus on effects, some on frame rate? Who? Where? All we've seen is devs sacrificing image quality and performance for resolution.

@Antwan3K said:

no onesaid the Xbox One X was going to match what's possible on PC and no one expects the Xbox One X to match whats possible on PC?..

No one? Really? You never used the words, "ultra settings?"

Yet what we get is "lower than PC's low setting"

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#48 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3235 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@goldenelementxl: Where's the PS4 comparison?

Why do we need that? Multiplatform games shouldn't even be considered on PS4/Pro. Between the inferior console hardware, bad online and that garbage controller... No thanks. The PS4 is for exclusives only. And that's pushing it considering those are mostly interactive movies.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#49 Edited by SecretPolice (35326 posts) -

The PC I can but today >>>>>>>> The PC bought a year or two ago. :0

Derp...Moooaar news at 11:00. :P

Avatar image for true_link
#50 Edited by True_Link (243 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: because some people have no need for more than one console and some people only have the PS4? Bad online and garbage controller are opinions, not facts. Not everyone is a blind fannie like you.