• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

GiantBomb - TitanFall framerate in mech combat is not fixed in Xbox One retail code

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is Jeff really the only one reporting on this shit amidst an avalanche of 9's?

Incredible.

Polygon mentions it -

"If there are complaints to be had, I'd point to performance. Titanfall sits at 60 frames per second most of the time, but when three or four Titans are on the screen at once, firing rockets and arc blasts, things take a dive. It's never not playable, but it is noticeable."

http://www.polygon.com/2014/3/10/5467906/titanfall-review
 
After playing the beta, I have to say people who think it dropping to single digits is consistent are crazy. Sure, in Last Titan Standing when you have all 12 Titans out there, and if they all go towards the same location to fight, I could see that. The beta struggled with that.

That's exactly the situation Gerstmann was talking about. A number of Titans in a small area dropped the frame rate to approximately single digits.

It sounds like the bigger problem Gerstmann had with Titanfall's performance was a noticeable amount of screen tearing.
 
Makes me think of all the Dead Rising 3 threads the claimed the sky was falling because the frame rate was crap. Then a patch was released post review and the frame rate was solid, never wavering. Seems to me like a few days from now will be a better litmus for the game. This game has had more negative threads on GAF prior to it even releasing, that one has to wonder why.
 
Well, he was mostly addressing the cross-section of people who own an xbox one and are complaining about Titanfall performance. Those people are enough in the know to complain about performance online, but not enough to know that they could have spent the same amount of money on a PC instead and get superior performance.

You have a better way with words than I.
 
Polygon mentions it -

"If there are complaints to be had, I'd point to performance. Titanfall sits at 60 frames per second most of the time, but when three or four Titans are on the screen at once, firing rockets and arc blasts, things take a dive. It's never not playable, but it is noticeable."

http://www.polygon.com/2014/3/10/5467906/titanfall-review
Well that doesn't sound anything like single digits.

Playability of a shooter completely falls apart below low twenties.
 
No, in his little scenario of PC wonderland, the VHS tape was the XB1 version of Titanfall, and the VHS machine was the Xbox One.

Yeah i went back and read what he wrote its a little disingenuous. The XB1 version has some performance issues but its not like bayonetta ps3 problems. I still think it is a little crazy that the VHS version/360 will probably have better performance than the XBO version because of the mature tools and reduced features.
 
Be9dEbD.png


I don't think its that bad. But I hope they'll patch it.
 
Hmm, maybe if the drop the resolution to 720p and toned down the textures a little bit they could get that frame-rate under control. It's almost like they forced themselves not to drop it for some non-neogaf related reason.
 
Its fine stop exaggerating I played the beta for good 10-15 hours, never had issues

So you having no issues means everyone else is just fucking around and their claims are just BS?

Remember where there is smoke, there is fire

Unless you have the super X1 and others are rocking the basic X1
 
In the beta I noticed some framerate drops on XB1, not single digit bad, but noticeable. PC beta was pretty silky smooth though after enabling vsync through the nvidia control panel to get rid of the horrid screen tearing.
 
Makes me think of all the Dead Rising 3 threads the claimed the sky was falling because the frame rate was crap. Then a patch was released post review and the frame rate was solid, never wavering. Seems to me like a few days from now will be a better litmus for the game. This game has had more negative threads on GAF prior to it even releasing, that one has to wonder why.

Well, there is supposed to be a patch day one no?
 
Why would Respawn intentionally gimp their own, brand new, company-defining IP just to spite a leak from an industry insider?

I mean, seriously?

They'd allow single-digit frame rate dips just to say they're running at higher than 720p?

What could they POSSIBLY gain from something so stupid and fickle other than some bad press and a profit shift from XB1 to PC?

I just can't believe they would do that willingly.
 
There's a lot of overreacting in here to what people think is Jeff overreacting. Inception thread.

Jeff's not saying the game is unplayable or that the drops or even a frequent occurence. Just that they are still in the game, and that anyone who noticed them in the beta (which plenty did) and were hoping they'd be fixed are going to be a little underwhelmed.

The way I read his comment, he had way more of an issue with the screen tearing, which I totally get as sceen tearing does my head in and makes me glad I'm not buying the Xbox One version.

Be9dEbD.png


I don't think its that bad. But I hope they'll patch it.

This is scant consolation though. A drop to 30fps from 60 is just as jarring and frustrating as a drop from 30 to single figures.
 
Makes me think of all the Dead Rising 3 threads the claimed the sky was falling because the frame rate was crap. Then a patch was released post review and the frame rate was solid, never wavering. Seems to me like a few days from now will be a better litmus for the game. This game has had more negative threads on GAF prior to it even releasing, that one has to wonder why.

That is factually incorrect. The framerate was never fixed.
 
This is scant consolation though. A drop to 30fps from 60 is just as jarring and frustrating as a drop from 30 to single figures.

bullshit. a drop from 60 to 30 is still perfectly playable, whereas a drop from 30 to single figures is not.
 
Jeez. Horrible if true. I wonder if they needed to up the res so the X1 version would run at a higher res than the X360 version.

Res, not res, bottleneck aside the game's probably decent, but it's just sad that it has to be a sword to MS in a battle they just can't win. (I mean graphics)
 
Why would Respawn intentionally gimp their own, brand new, company-defining IP just to spite a leak from an industry insider?

I mean, seriously?

They'd allow single-digit frame rate dips just to say they're running at higher than 720p?

What could they POSSIBLY gain from something so stupid and fickle other than some bad press and a profit shift from XB1 to PC?

I just can't believe they would do that willingly.
Lowering resolution =/= better framerates. Titanfall runs on a heavily modified source engine, the source engine is heavily CPU bound. For all we know it could be the CPU causing the framedrops and not the GPU, in which case lowering the resolution doesn't a tiny bit.
 
Source engine relies heavily on the cpu side for render. I guess if resolution doesn't have a great impact in these slowdowns, so releasing at 720p not have been the solution. Surely the cpu clock upgrade into xbone was sued by respawn at first.

Titanfall 2 will use a different engine.

One can only imagine...
 
I've been looking at other reviews to confirm this but the only one to even talk about framerate that I know of was Polygon and they said it drops but isn't unplayable.

If GB is right, single digits sounds unplayable. Maybe just a hitch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom