They really dont.
Quantum Break PC performance thread
- Thread starter GroinShooter
- Start date
They really dont.
abracadaver
Member
It won't be purchasable until it unlocks.
It's still not out. I know it should unlock in a few minutes but your countdown was pretty wrong.
oh it was? ok that sounds interesting.
I bet you can't play Quantum Break on very well on my old 770 GTX 2GB card but ran both Tomb Raider and Doom more adequately enough at 1080p at around 60FPS. That's why I have waited till I get it cheap on my newer rig.
I do feel sorry for people who paid full whack on the Microsoft store as Forza Horizon 3 is bad enough at that ridiculous price.
I dont' think they look better at all. Especially those screenshots. Art style can be great, but I just don't get the impression that there's as much tech going on, it's pretty OBVIOUS. Doom for example has great lighting but the poly-count and things going on on screen aren't all that impressive. Heck, those screenshots look really rough at full res. Tons of aliasing, low polys, etc. Much of the scenery's design is textures too. For example a bolt on a box is a texture in those games, where as in QB the entire bolt, the through pin, the lock on it...it's all rendered.
In a glance TR and Doom look great, but I think this proves a point that people don't see beyond an initial glance of what exactly the game is doing to create the scene. There are massive shortcuts (texture res, polygons, lack of lighting/reflection, etc.) in the scenes.
Just referring to his personal screenshots as far as AA
A lot of people really do miss the things I'm listing when playing/looking at a game.
It was based on this tweet from RiotRMD:
The Steam version of @QuantumBreak will unlock at 6AM PST / 4PM Finland time on Thursday the 29th. So today. #quantumbreak
But it has been deleted.
Completely agree, the game looks amazing. The density of effects in this game is ridiculous. I've never seen anything like it before.
I think people just see that it isn't the sharpest game out there and ignore all the stuff going on.
https://youtu.be/ANIG2HQJZDI?t=339
You're not referring to DOOM as well when you said this, right? RotTR is definitely pretty jagged unless you use SSAA, but DOOM with 8x TSSAA is extremely clean.
Beer Monkey
Member
I'm sure this has been covered before, but the X1 version is roughly equivalent to what settings on the PC version?
abracadaver
Member
Downloading now to an HDD. I hope it works well enough.
matrix-cat
Member
Downloading now. You only have to download 36.1GB ('only' 
) and it'll presumably unpack to the full 68. Thank heaven for small favours. See you in nine and a half hours, then.
) and it'll presumably unpack to the full 68. Thank heaven for small favours. See you in nine and a half hours, then.SilentRage47
Member
Bought it on GMG at a pretty good price. Download should be finished in 1 hour, can't wait to be disapointed about the performance. lol
digitalrelic
Banned
Oh come on. Opinions are opinions, sure. But I can guarantee you this game won't be winning any "Best Graphics" awards at the end of 2016.
Hell, just the fact that a 1080, which is about 7x as fast as the Xbox One GPU, can't run the game properly tells you all you need to know about the quality of this port.
It's still 4-4.5x the performance of the xbox one in this game.
digitalrelic
Banned
Exactly? Why is a card that's at least 7x faster performing at 4x performance?
I simply cannot believe some of the defenders of the performance of this game. It's puzzling.
Well, I don't know how a 1080 normally compares. I thought that was decent.
And it's obviously not 7x faster at everything lol. You can't just use a single number to compare completely different architectures.
Because performance of game doesn't go up in linear line as power of GPU increases? Especially if and when game utilizes more advanced tech or more taxing settings on existing tech than games console version?
Finished installing the game. By default the game did pick ultra settings (with upscaling on).
Running around the campus in the first area gives me ~47-60fps on a RX480. Not really indicative of how the game might run in more complex scenes. Just as an first impression
I think I'd rather reduce some of the settings and try going with upscaling off. Roughly 30fps with upscaling off and ultra settings.
Running around the campus in the first area gives me ~47-60fps on a RX480. Not really indicative of how the game might run in more complex scenes. Just as an first impression
I think I'd rather reduce some of the settings and try going with upscaling off. Roughly 30fps with upscaling off and ultra settings.
Right, the benchmarks I'm looking at(gamegpu) are also running higher quality than the xbox version.
digitalrelic
Banned
Obviously everything doesn't always scale perfectly linearly. This still offers no explanation as to why the game performs so terribly compared to other multiplatform titles that look as good or better than Quantum Break.
...because there is no legitimate explanation. The game performs so terribly because it's a shitty, rushed, half-assed port. One of the worst ports in the last 10 years. Probably the worst port since GTA IV.
digitalrelic
Banned
Yes. They haven't done anything to address performance in many months. Support for this game on the Windows Store is dead.
Titles such as?
mdsfx
Member
Ugh... Well that's disappointing
Edited: is pirating a Steam version of game I own on the Windows Store still illegal? Lol. Ugh, don't answer that.
RamaTheVoice
Member
Yes, but I believe they stated that performance updates to the Steam version would also be released for the UWP version, so there's hope.
Are there any benchmarks that use equivalent settings to the xbox(medium)? Most seem to use ultra which are considerably more demanding.
Ugh... Well that's disappointing
Edited: is pirating a Stream version of game I own on the Windows Store still illegal? Lol. Ugh, don't answer that.
I answer anyways. It is.
digitalrelic
Banned
Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Witcher 3, MGS V, DOOM, Star Wars Battlefront, Assassin's Creed Syndicate, etc.. etc.. I could go on and on.
From all of that MAYBE BFront, but even that isn't that impressive when closely inspecting models. Especially faces on heroes look weird and low quality, at least to me. Other games you listed while looking from okay to impressive don't come anywhere near image quality and clearness of Quantum Break that screenshots in this thread show.
And I say this as someone who loves TW3 and DOOM from graphics to gameplay to story.
acs and mgs are pretty ugly games tbh
Other than BF, none of those are on the same level..
You can dislike the performance all you want (most people won't argue you there), but these kinds of statements are silly.
digitalrelic
Banned
Are you seriously associating image quality and clearness with Quantum fucking Break?! It's one of the blurriest games I've ever seen in my life.
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone in this thread.
Same reaction here. I mean, the lightning, SSS etc are nice sure.
But the overall image clarity is just horrible, upscaling on or off. Same goes for the image "fidelity". It just looks pretty bland for what it demands, super crazy lightning and whatever else aside.
I've played every one of them maxed out at 5k (except Doom) and none of them even come to Quantum Break. Easily the best looking game on PC at the moment.
Sounds like you've just never properly Quantum Break. IQ/cleanness is completely a non-issue at native 4K or upscaled 5k.
digitalrelic
Banned
Okay, if you have literally the best hardware on the planet, and you're willing to play PC games at 30fps with drops, I'm sure Quantum Break looks pretty clear at native 4K.
CaptainSmirnov
Member
The game looked decent in cut scenes but can't say the same for the models during the main gameplay, quite ugly tbh.
Probably didn't help I had to run the game at 1080p on a 4k screen.
Anyways, I agree this game, other than some nice effects, didn't look too hot. Seemed like something was missing.
The performance issue left a bad taste in my mouth. I'll probably try out the steam edition
Yeah what kind of crazy person expects clear IQ at 1080P? Ha ha!
What are the exact settings and resolution the XB1 version renders at, and how do those exact settings run on an equivalent PC?
Because if those settings and that resolution runs much worse then that's the only way you can really claim the port is "shitty".
If it performs somewhat comparably then you are simply unhappy with the choices made when designing the game's renderer.
(This is an actual question, I have no idea what the XB1 version renders at or the settings it uses, and how that runs on roughly comparable PC hardware)
Well I did played it with the best consumer GPU on the market, but that's not the point. You just need to realize that most of these ultra settings are useless and you could only tell a difference if you flip the screenshots back and forth. That and a locked 30fps works perfectly fine for this game.
The XB1 runs at medium settings and renders at 720p. On pc, the nearest equivalent would be 1600*900 with the upscaling option on. Haven't found any benchmarks testing at those exact settings, but I did find a guy on youtube with a gtx 660 running them fine locked at 30 fps. Not apples to apples, but it's still better than I expected.
Just the warm and fuzzy feeling that comes with knowing you're not directly supporting Microsoft's attempt at building a walled garden.
marlowesghost
Member
It's one of the softest and blurry games I've played. I can't believe the people in here defending the look. Also lol at the guys saying it's clear at 4k, and then has the temerity to suggest we aren't playing it properly because it's not at that resolution. Gotta be a joke.
icecold1983
Member
this, and so is tomb raider anytime youre not in a tomb
yeah the snowy woodland area is one the ugliest areas ive seen in a game for a while