Hazardous Metal
Member
Anyone who plays this game on PC knows that getting a solid 60FPS in populated areas even on Medium settings is impossible. The game is incredibly CPU-bound so I'm not surprised by this at all.
Anyone who plays this game on PC knows that getting a solid 60FPS in populated areas even on Medium settings is impossible. The game is incredibly CPU-bound so I'm not surprised by this at all.
I guess Gamingbolt is sleeping atm 😂 so wccftech is following the money.Why is WCCFTech getting sourced more often these days? @_@
So I can assume you're working on the game then or have insider knowledge why this should the case.they should be able to get 4k@60fps
they should be able to get 4k@60fps
Hotdamn that's awesome. It has enough power to go 4k with the additional flourishes that the Pro can only achieve if the resolution is lowered to 1080p.
I'm sure it could, but it'd look like ass.We had the chance to speak with Game Director Matt Firor at E3 2017 and ask him whether the Xbox One X was powerful enough to run Elder Scrolls Online at 4K@60FPS.
they should be able to get 4k@60fps
they should be able to get 4k@60fps
Let's not forget that MS also freed up that extra GB of RAM. That news appeared right before E3. For sure things like that help out a lot as well. That's why I sure as hell hope most third parties will bother with this and not just leave all the extra power to waste.
No, the exact same resolution. The difference lies in other effects.wow HUGE difference in Resolution.
They are not jumping from 1080p to 2160p, they're going from 2160p to 2160p with improved effects. And the dev didn't mention better textures, which they almost certainly would if present.Well, 1080p to 4K is a big jump, dunno for this game but the more memory could also provide better textures even with Pro at 1080p.
No they are not.And most games on Pro are 1800c, with little to no added graphics settings....
If you just think about it, you'd realize this can't possibly be true. The One X is more powerful than Pro, but nowhere near four times as powerful. What's far more likely is that the dev didn't want to spend a huge amount of time tweaking performance, so didn't bother examining intermediate resolution options for the low mode.Hotdamn that's awesome. It has enough power to go 4k with the additional flourishes that the Pro can only achieve if the resolution is lowered to 1080p.
No, the exact same resolution. The difference lies in other effects.
They are not jumping from 1080p to 2160p, they're going from 2160p to 2160p with improved effects. And the dev didn't mention better textures, which they almost certainly would if present.
No they are not.
If you just think about it, you'd realize this can't possibly be true. The One X is more powerful than Pro, but nowhere near four times as powerful. What's far more likely is that the dev didn't want to spend a huge amount of time tweaking performance, so didn't bother examining intermediate resolution options for the low mode.
Thanks, though I was already aware of that.Second you are right....
I mean given the hardware they should have pushed for 60fps. But ESO is not well optimized even with a 1070 fps drops to below 60 sometimes in 30s in towns with lot of people at 1080p.
I hope they put decent CPUs in the next gen consoles so we can get more 60 FPS games.
Devs would sadly still focus on creating 30fps titles even if the consoles were equipped with a Threadripper CPU.I hope they put decent CPUs in the next gen consoles so we can get more 60 FPS games.
Thanks, though I was already aware of that.
It depends exactly what you mean by that question. I believe I said in another thread that the vast majority of titles are 1080p on Pro, because they don't have any official support at all. The same will surely be true on Xbox One X as well.Liabe you're the owner of the Pro improvements thread right? At last count weren't there more 2160 (dynamic or native) Pro titles than 1440/1800 etc?
It depends exactly what you mean by that question. I believe I said in another thread that the vast majority of titles are 1080p on Pro, because they don't have any official support at all. The same will surely be true on Xbox One X as well.
Of the games that do have official support, about a quarter of them are 1080p (32 out of 127). This is a combination of perfunctory support, the occasional title rising from 900p, and devs who consciously chose to focus on cranking up graphical effects or framerate instead of resolution.
If we're just talking about the 95 games that do have higher-resolution modes, then the answer to your question is yes. In that category, there are 54 games with what Microsoft labels as "True 4K" resolution, and 41 with lower (about a 57/43 split). Since it will undoubtedly come up, 37 of those 4K games are native 4K.
Remember when 900p was a huge deal Vs 1080p?
Here we have 1080p Vs 4k!
Wow!
That would be a bit disappointing because isn't Pro already hitting checkerboard 4K pretty often with games now? So that's only going to mean XB1X will maintain the resolution better?
No we don't
fp16 mode in this game for pro would be a game changer
That's more like it. If both systems are used properly we should see either -
a) Graphics parity, with X1X having much higher resolution
or
b) Same or similar resolution, with better graphics, textures etc on X1X
30fps vs 60fps ain't happening except maybe on some rare cases. Dat Jaguar.
No we don't
Resolution Gate 2nd RoundRemember when 900p was a huge deal Vs 1080p?
Here we have 1080p Vs 4k!
Wow!
Umm that's exactly what it is. The Pro can't output 4k at those graphical settings. If it could, the game would be 4k at those settings.
Users have the chance to pick between a native 4K (2160P) resolution at 30 frames per second or, alternatively, stay at Full HD (1080P) resolution to get better shadows, ambient occlusion, and water reflections.
We had the chance to speak with Game Director Matt Firor at E3 2017 and ask him whether the Xbox One X was powerful enough to run Elder Scrolls Online at 4K@60FPS. The team is still making tweaks at this point, but he replied that its most likely going to run at 4K@30FPS while also getting those additional graphics effects that PS4 Pro only enables when running at 1080P resolution.
I mean given the hardware they should have pushed for 60fps. But ESO is not well optimized even with a 1070 fps drops to below 60 sometimes in 30s in towns with lot of people at 1080p.
Shame they didn't keep the same visuals and bump the performance. Game is no looker.
Yes.Are they doing native and not cb on pro?
There's a huge difference between "the Pro can't run those settings at native 4K" and "the Pro can only run these settings at 1080p". The first statement is true, and the second statement is basically impossible.The Pro can't output 4k at those graphical settings. If it could, the game would be 4k at those settings.
It straight up looks like "Video Game"
It's the game I picture when in a tv show a kids holding a GameCube controller and they flash a shot of the tv with an original xbox plugged in.
It's the most generic crap I've ever seen. It's like someone described a video game to a first year art student who has never played a game before.
Umm that's exactly what it is. The Pro can't output 4k at those graphical settings. If it could, the game would be 4k at those settings.
thats not what it saysnot 60fps!? Damn parity strikes again!
I'm just kidding, but seriously, i hope people realize that these CPU's are not miracle workers and they aren't going to cause FPS to jump like that.
its not 1080p vs 4K, its 4K vs 4K with higher graphical settings.
Oh boy.
And. Here. We. Go.
I wonder if FIFA, COD, Destiny, will have the infamous'graphics parity clause' now, but the other way?
By the way - to be clear, I very much doubt such a clause exists or ever existed.