When Should A Game Be Described as Unplayable?

  • 88 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

Edited By sammo21

I came across a weird thought while listening to GB's end of year discussions. If you listened to most every comment regarding the subject from Brad you would think that Fallout 4, Witcher 3, Just Cause 3, etc. are literally "unplayable" on Xbone and PS4. I can understand an opinion that those versions aren't as good as their PC counterpart, because they aren't (and really, no matter what, they never should be better on consoles), but calling them unplayable is either becoming hyperbolic (and not factual) or its a lie from anger because of frustration (assumption on my part because I can't think of any other reason).

I've played/owned all of these on consoles (PS4) and I can tell you that they are not unplayable. Do they load quickly? No. Are they as good looking? No, but in Fallout 4's case I don't think it looks especially great on PC either. Brad even tried, unsuccessfully, to claim that Witcher 3 didn't look very good on consoles.

I've put about 50-60+ hours into FO4 on PS4 and about 30-40 hours into Witcher 3...both are great no matter where you play them. The only time I had performance issues on W3 was in part of the swamp, so at best I had an hour of performance issues total (not even close, but rounded up). With FO4 I never had any performance issues outside the myriad of bugs (which are system agnostic largely) and long load times. Just Cause 3 really only suffers from long load times, which does suck but calling it unplayable is a bit much.

I think the thing that bothered me so much was that Brad’s comment weren’t hyperbolic jest but that he actually believes that. I’m totally fine with PC elitism…I’ve been there myself. The PC has, and always will, offer more than consoles can…but that’s beside the point.

My issue is when someone makes an objective comment like that, but it also makes me wonder…when does a game become unplayable? I would think we could all agree that games like the recent Afro Samurai are unplayable or even things like Arkham Knight (for some people) were literally unplayable. Having a few dips in framerate here or there or longer load times doesn’t make something “unplayable” does it? Considering the console versions of these games always vastly outsell the PC versions I would say the public, and gamers (players, reviewers) at large do not think so.

Avatar image for cloudymusic
cloudymusic

2203

Forum Posts

4877

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

The performance in all three of those games never comes close (as far as I've ever seen) to stuff like Dark Souls Blighttown on consoles, which I was replaying on PS3 recently because I'm a bad person. The framerates definitely get bad in spots, but I agree that "unplayable" is a bit much. I never experienced any of the horrendous issues that Jeff described in FO4, so maybe my opinion would be different if I had.

Personally, the load times in Just Cause 3 and Bloodborne were much more annoying than any framerate issues I had this year.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@cloudymusic: Right but annoying is far different than unplayable. I agree, remembering to my own time with DS on consoles that area was rough. Glad I was only there for just an hour or two.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

I consider a game that regularly dips down into sub-20 FPS territory to be unplayable. It's one of the reasons I haven't owned any consoles in years.

Avatar image for jesus_phish
Jesus_Phish

4118

Forum Posts

3307

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I used to raid in WoW on an underpowered PC, hitting single digit frame rates at the start of boss fights and would have to aim my camera at the ground at times just to stop hitting 0 fps. That's as close to unplayable as I've gotten in a game.

Things being unplayable is subjective and there tends to be a lot of hyperbole about the level of un-playability of something with people who think something like FO4, W3 on consoles are unplayable really hammering it home that they think it's unplayable for everyone.

It's just a level of standards and acceptance. I accept that FO4 isn't going to run at full speed on my PS4 at the same time that I accept that FO4 is just another Fallout game.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@mike: Weird reason to not own consoles considering that very rarely happens.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

@sammo21 said:

@mike: Weird reason to not own consoles considering that very rarely happens.

I said it was ONE of the reasons. I could name a whole bunch.

Avatar image for vash108
Vash108

188

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

#7  Edited By Vash108

For the past few days Rainbow 6 Siege, an always online game, has been pretty unplayable with matches not counting towards you renown gain and sometimes will just freeze at a loading screen because it can't synchronize with thinly servers when you boot it up.

This has been across all consoles and PC.

Avatar image for justin258
Justin258

16684

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 8

#9  Edited By Justin258

They're not unplayable, but we as consumers should demand better performance on something we're spending sixty bucks. A constant 30FPS has become the goal and not the barebones standard - I can safely expect almost every AAA game to chug on consoles at some point.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@believer258: So when should consumers "demand" a publisher/developer like Bethesda to move to a new engine so their games look better? I think consumers are setting the standard by what they accept as purchasing games = being fine with it.

Avatar image for lestephan
LeStephan

1274

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I sometimes wonder where everyone was last generation, I still regularly play games on ps1,2 and 3 and a lot of games there have HORRIBLE framedrops. WAY worse than this gen, Just cause 2 on ps3 for example is often barely acceptable imo and it looks like shit on top of that . I guess the ps2 gen was kinda better in that regard but even games like PoP sands of time which people praised into the heavens have regular super noticable framedrops on ps2, never heard anyone complain though...I agree its better to not have framedrops but its not like console games running less than optimal is something new. Everyone suddenly being super focussed on it and thinking its unacceptable IS new though. I kinda wonder what caused that to happen..

I have played most AAA releases on ps4 and most have been totally fine imho.

And on the subject of the witcher 3, most of the GB crew didnt make it very far past the swamp missions right? So Brad too probably didnt see much more than the worse performing parts of the gameworld :P

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

Everyone suddenly being super focussed on it and thinking its unacceptable IS new though. I kinda wonder what caused that to happen..

Progress. Standards change over time.

Avatar image for jinoru
Jinoru

439

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 21

#13  Edited By Jinoru

Unplayable means you literally can't play the game because it won't start, consistently crashes, or controls do not respond.

When they say that in podcasts they're truncating "borderline unplayable" I believe.

Avatar image for gaff
Gaff

2768

Forum Posts

120

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@jinoru: Or even better, they're truncating "I personally consider it borderline unplayable".

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@jinoru: Borderline unplayable is still incredibly hyperbolic when bringing up something like FO4, Witcher 3, or Just Cause 3. Especially considering I've seen people say having to put a disc in is too much work which would make the disc version of any game unplayable for them.

Avatar image for jinoru
Jinoru

439

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 21

@gaff said:

@jinoru: Or even better, they're truncating "I personally consider it borderline unplayable".

Oh yes! This!

Avatar image for defaultprophet
defaultprophet

840

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

If brad says a game is unplayable on a GOTY podcast, it's probably near perfect.

Avatar image for deactivated-629ec706f0783
deactivated-629ec706f0783

1682

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's a common trend that's happened for the last year or so around these parts, though it's attaining full speed. Most the bombcrew has moved away from consoles of all sorts, and it seemed like this year more then previous, they only played the console version of a game as long as they had to for coverage, then switched to PC or stopped playing to "wait for the PC release".

Now this is more then fine as a personal decision, but I feel like it brought disdain for the new consoles more then they deserve. They aren't the powerhouses PCs can be, but of course they aren't, and they are still worlds better then last generation. But a lot of rhetoric this year has made it seem like if you aren't playing the PC version of anything, you are playing garbage.

It's somewhat unfortunate, as some people either can't/don't want to spend the money on a PC that can manage to play all high end things, or (and this one may shock people) some people actually prefer to play games on a console! I personally hate playing anything on my PC that isn't in the vein of an MMO, even though it can handle most things.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@takayamasama: Not to mention the overwhelming amount of people buying these games are on console, 30% PC & 70% consoles in some cases.

Avatar image for monetarydread
monetarydread

2898

Forum Posts

92

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#20  Edited By monetarydread

I have spent the last two decades looking at games running smoothly because I am a PC gamer first and foremost. I tried to play Fallout 4 on my roommates PS4 and I would easily consider the frame rates to be unplayable. Maybe I am just spoiled, but the frame rate is so uneven I actually get motion sickness that isn't there when playing the game at 60fps on my PC. As far as terrible decisions go; I would easily put an uneven frame rate as being worse than games that have forced cutscenes you can't skip then putting a checkpoint right in front of the cutscene. I might have been willing to put up with that bullshit when I was playing San Andreas on my ps2, but I am no longer willing to tolerate that garbage anymore. If a game doesn't have a locked frame-rate, I am not willing to accept that and will save my money by not buying it. Hopefully more people start thinking like I do and vote with their wallets because this choppy frame-rate bullshit has to end.

Edit: I was thinking that a solid frame rate is an experience like HD resolution. If you have never experienced it consistently, you probably don't understand what the fuss is about. Yet, if you get used to HD then try to play those same games at 480p you will be annoyed that they aren't in HD to the point where that becomes a prerequisite for you to even consider playing something. Like really, I tried to play Burnout 3 on my PS2 a while back and it was terrible, I forgot how annoying it was to see EVERY car in the distance and 5 or 6 blurry pixels that barely even resembles a blob, let alone a car, and I am supposed to decide if this blob is coming toward me or away from me and react accordingly? I can't go back to that and I feel the same way about smooth frame rates.

Avatar image for monetarydread
monetarydread

2898

Forum Posts

92

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@sammo21 said:

@takayamasama: Not to mention the overwhelming amount of people buying these games are on console, 30% PC & 70% consoles in some cases.

All the more reason for developers to get their shit together and not design games that can't be run properly on consoles.

Avatar image for corvak
Corvak

2047

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By Corvak

I think the unplayability of these titles depends entirely on whether you have access to a gaming PC.

I obsess about framerate (so I spent $500 on a GTX 980) and I hate managing discs and load times (so I bought an SSD and a big storage drive) but I hardly feel like these games are 'unplayable' on consoles. Not up to my standards perhaps, but certainly playable and enjoyable, even with longer loads and lower framerates.

I think Halo 5 is the game we should turn to for how to do 60fps console games, the scaling thing it does is amazing, and maximizes quality vs. speed. You can hack apart screenshots and videos and find real dumb distant textures and enemy models but you do not ever really see em during gameplay, I was too busy playing the game to notice.

So while I play PC and consider it 'better' I'm actually just spending money to get that. It's like saying a Porsche is better than a Toyota. At the end of the day, you can always get a better experience by adding silly amounts of money, but its your call how much that matters to you.

To answer the OP's question, I guess i'd call something unplayable if the framerate drops below 30fps for sustainted periods (making the game hard to control during action sequences), or if it crashes so frequently that progress becomes a chore.

Avatar image for thelastgunslinger
thelastgunslinger

619

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 9

It's completely subjective. I played 74 hours of Fallout 4 on the Xbox One and only once or twice hit a framerate drop that actually impacted my enjoyment of the game. The term "unplayable" really just means "unacceptable to me" unless you're talking about actual hard crashes. When SOMA launched on PS4 there was a bug that crashed and locked the console about an hour and half into the game. That was unplayable.

Avatar image for monetarydread
monetarydread

2898

Forum Posts

92

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#24  Edited By monetarydread

It's a common trend that's happened for the last year or so around these parts, though it's attaining full speed. Most the bombcrew has moved away from consoles of all sorts, and it seemed like this year more then previous, they only played the console version of a game as long as they had to for coverage, then switched to PC or stopped playing to "wait for the PC release".

Now this is more then fine as a personal decision, but I feel like it brought disdain for the new consoles more then they deserve. They aren't the powerhouses PCs can be, but of course they aren't, and they are still worlds better then last generation. But a lot of rhetoric this year has made it seem like if you aren't playing the PC version of anything, you are playing garbage.

It's somewhat unfortunate, as some people either can't/don't want to spend the money on a PC that can manage to play all high end things, or (and this one may shock people) some people actually prefer to play games on a console! I personally hate playing anything on my PC that isn't in the vein of an MMO, even though it can handle most things.

See, I think that we are in a generation where there is no seperation between console and PC gaming. They are all attempting the same thing, and if two versions of a game are objectively inferior to the other version than it is a reviewers duty to call out that bullshit. You might prefer to play a game on a traditional console, but that doesn't mean the PC version doesn't exist or is seperated from the console versions.

Avatar image for liquiddragon
liquiddragon

4314

Forum Posts

978

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 19

Ehh these guys talk for hours and sometimes things get heated and you say things you don't quite mean to drive a position. It's not something he would ever write if he was reviewing a game. I mean think of the times someone has said a game was "hot garbage". Also, to some degree they try to be over the top and hyperbolic to be funny or entertaining. After all, it's video games, not foreign affairs. We can all stand to lighten up about this stuff.

But what's unplayable to me? If the game is good, I've never reach that point. Enjoyed Max Payne on the PS2 cause I had no choice at the time.

Avatar image for honkalot
Honkalot

1046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Eh, literally everyone uses hyperbole in discussions.

FO4 and JC3 have some times for me dropped down to 5-10 fps, I would actually call those instances unplayable. But in both cases it's temporary things so I wouldn't call the games themselves unplayable.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

@honkalot said:

Eh, literally everyone uses hyperbole in discussions.

hah

Avatar image for n7
N7

4159

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 2

Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are both a little janky with their framerates but I can understand the Just Cause 3 complaint. I think after the 3rd consecutive 5 minute long loading time I was done with it. I felt like it was actively punishing me for playing the game and I just couldn't take it anymore.

Avatar image for slag
Slag

8308

Forum Posts

15965

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 45

For me unplayable means a condition in which the game is functionally broken to where I can't play it competently. Usually some game breaking bugs, or perhaps I have hardware that lacks the capability to run a game adequately.

In terms of framerate my personal threshold for unplayable is when game dips into sub 10fps for extended periods of time frequently in places where my reaction timing matters, when the game doesn't intend to. Fallout 4 on console seems playable to me but definitely doesn't seem great. I wouldn't dream of playing that game anywhere but PC.

@jinoru said:
@gaff said:

@jinoru: Or even better, they're truncating "I personally consider it borderline unplayable".

Oh yes! This!

yeah that's how I took it too.

Brad does this kind of shortening frequently when he praises or criticizes something that makes his opinion sound more extreme and absolute than I believe his opinions really are in his mind. Then Jeff or somebody, but usually Jeff, says something challenging him on it, and then he usually walks it back a little.

I have friends who do that a lot in their speech unconsciously so I don't consider it a big deal. As long as it doesn't crop up in say a written review or somewhere where it goes on record in an official capacity. If you are going to use that kind of language in a published venue, then you gotta back it up with strong arguments. In a podcast or arguing behind closed doors or what have you, it's no big deal.

It definitely is harder to handle dips to 20fps, if you have become accustomed to the 60fps lifestyle though.

Avatar image for olph
OLph

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I've played Fallout 4 and Just Cause 3 on the Xbox One so I would say that those are playable. Fallout had a lot of crashes for me and a few areas had a framerate that wasn't enough to play the fights there as I would have liked. The framerate didn't really bother me in Just Cause but I had to start some casual game on my PC to entertain me during the insane loading times (Most notable when I was completing the challenges).

Avatar image for deactivated-5b531a34b946c
deactivated-5b531a34b946c

1251

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Brad's been doing that for a long time, but you're right in that he's gone full steam ahead on it in the past year or so. Personally, I've been playing on a pretty decent PC for a few years now, and while I certainly notice when a game's running at 30 fps or happens to dip down every now and then, "unplayable" hardly ever crosses my mind.
I consider "unplayable" to be when the game crashes, soft locks, or has a framerate dip that eats your inputs. Also, running at sub 25 or so on a constant basis can make it actually hard to play, but that doesn't happen often.

To be honest, even as someone with a decent machine it irritates me when people in the media use hyperbole like this. Not everyone can afford to build a machine to run The Witcher 3 at 1080p+ 60fps. Hell, I'd bet a lot of people playing the game on PC can't do that. So are they playing "unplayable garbage"? No, but that's what Brad's saying. They should judge a game on merit alone, and then praise or call out PC ports based on their optimization - not judge a game based on its optimization and throw out all its merits for the other versions.

Avatar image for metalbaofu
MetalBaofu

1710

Forum Posts

1270

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

#32  Edited By MetalBaofu

I wouldn't call something "unplayable" unless it actually was unplayable. Meaning, I can't play it. Crashes all the time, glitch that stops progress, online game with insane lag/servers offline, etc.

The idea that Fallout 4, Witcher 3, or Just Cause 3 are "unplayable" on PS4 is crazy to me. If someone just prefers playing on PC due to performance/graphics/etc., then they should just say that instead of saying the console versions are "unplayable."

@n7 said:

Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are both a little janky with their framerates but I can understand the Just Cause 3 complaint. I think after the 3rd consecutive 5 minute long loading time I was done with it. I felt like it was actively punishing me for playing the game and I just couldn't take it anymore.

I played Just Cause on PS4 after they put the patch out that shortened load times and they never bothered me. Definitely never had a 5 minute load. My cousin played it before the patch and was complaining about the load times. So, if you were liking the actual game, then you might want to give it another shot at some point.

Avatar image for ajamafalous
ajamafalous

13992

Forum Posts

905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

It's all relative to each person's own personal standard and tolerance of those things. I've done 90% of my gaming over the last decade+ on top of the line PCs and GPUs, so, to me, the jump from 60+ to 50 is definitely immediately noticeable, and anything below 40 is so frustrating to me that I would rather just not play the game.

Ultimately any opinion about media is personal and subjective. If you have no issue dealing with sub-30 fps, long load times, bad textures, or whatever else, that's totally fine, but it's also totally fine if Brad doesn't want to deal with that stuff or find it acceptable as well.

Avatar image for ripelivejam
ripelivejam

13572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Internet will tell you all games need to be 1080p 60fps+ and 99% bug/crash free to even be acceptable. Fortunately my standards aren't as high and i have a modicum of patience/tolerance.

Fallout 4 didnt start on my laptop until i rolled back my nvidia driver so i guess that qualifies.

Avatar image for ry_ry
Ry_Ry

1929

Forum Posts

153

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By Ry_Ry

Mass Effect 3 on PS3 was unplayable (for me) the game wouldn't connect to EA servers for days on end so I gave up.

Bloodborne's frame drops and long load times didn't impact my enjoyment.

Avatar image for sterling
Sterling

4134

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

You want to try playing a legit unplayable game, go buy Ampersand on steam.

Avatar image for joshthestampede
JoshTheStampede

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37  Edited By JoshTheStampede

Yeah, I noticed that as well on the GOTY discussions. I also noticed that whenever they mentioned bad console performance, they called out FO4 and JC3 as if those have equal problems. I'm playing JC3 on an xbox one and it's...fine. Perfectly playable, with definite choppiness when you blow up really large objects or set off large chain reactions. But to call that unplayable is to ignore a very large gulf of "performance problems that do not really affect gameplay that much". Load times seem long but realistically I havent seen one over 60 seconds. Which is too long for comfort, sure, but people saying it was 5 minutes+ are again being hyperbolic.

Dipping under 20fps sometimes definitely sucks, but unplayable, really? You mean to tell me if that was the only version of the game that existed, you would literally not be able to play it, or would refuse to?

Then again, there's a FPS Police group on steam that refuses to play Undertale because it isn't 60fps so...

They've mentioned stuff like this a lot, about public perception taking hyperbolic comments as true, so you'd think they might be a little more aware of it. Vinny talking about how his family thinks the Xbox One is still always watching you, or that Battlefield 4 still literally doesn't work, etc

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
SpaceInsomniac

6353

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#38  Edited By SpaceInsomniac

@sammo21 said:

If you listened to most every comment regarding the subject from Brad you would think that Fallout 4, Witcher 3, Just Cause 3, etc. are literally "unplayable" on Xbone and PS4.

...

Brad even tried, unsuccessfully, to claim that Witcher 3 didn't look very good on consoles.

This is a good example of why I consider Brad "unlistenable."

For anyone on the fence about any of those games, Fallout 4 runs very nicely on the PS4. Load times are similar to Fallout 3 or Skyrim on the 360, and the game rarely has issues with frame rate. When it does, it's only for a second or so in busy city areas. My guess is that it has something to do with art assets loading.

Witcher 3 looks amazing, but it has some of the worst load times I've ever experienced on a console. Thankfully, you only have to worry about loading when you're starting the game up, when you fast travel, or when you die. Nearly everything else loads seamlessly in the background. The worst is when you die, but the game isn't all that difficult on the standard difficulty, so it's not too big of an issue.

And Just Cause 3 I haven't tried yet, so I can't weigh in on that one.

Then again, there's a FPS Police group on steam that refuses to play Undertale because it isn't 60fps so...

That's not at all accurate. Steam doesn't list framerates in their game descriptions, so Totalbiscuit created a group called the Framerate Police that lets gamers know which titles are locked to 30fps. The only way to objectively do that is to list EVERY game that features a locked 30fps, and let people decide from there. It's nowhere close to being a list of games you should refuse to play. Undertale was even in Totalbiscuit's top ten games of 2015.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

#39  Edited By mike

For anyone on the fence about any of those games, Fallout 4 runs very nicely on the PS4. Load times are similar to Fallout 3 or Skyrim on the 360, and the game rarely has issues with frame rate. When it does, it's only for a second or so in busy city areas.

Did Fallout 4 on consoles get patched after Digital Foundry did this frame rate comparison between PS4 and Xbox One? This doesn't seem like a game that runs "very nicely."

Loading Video...

Avatar image for honkalot
Honkalot

1046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

@mike said:

@honkalot said:

Eh, literally everyone uses hyperbole in discussions.

hah

;)

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
SpaceInsomniac

6353

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@mike said:
@spaceinsomniac said:

For anyone on the fence about any of those games, Fallout 4 runs very nicely on the PS4. Load times are similar to Fallout 3 or Skyrim on the 360, and the game rarely has issues with frame rate. When it does, it's only for a second or so in busy city areas.

Did Fallout 4 on consoles get patched after Digital Foundry did this frame rate comparison between PS4 and Xbox One? This doesn't seem like a game that runs "very nicely."

The first area shown in the video was specifically targeted by Bethesda in an update. I only started playing the game after Christmas, but I've not run into many noticeable framerate issues. Of course, I'm just playing the game as I normally would, and not trying to create explosions in highly populated areas to test the engine or anything like that. I was prepared for the worst, and came away pleasantly surprised.

Avatar image for pancakepatriarchate
PancakePatriarchate

117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Internet will tell you all games need to be 1080p 60fps+ and 99% bug/crash free to even be acceptable.

I've noticed this line of thinking has become more prominent. Somehow a bug-free, silky-smooth framerate on ultra-settings are the standard and anything less is 'worse'. Unfortunately this type of discussion will lead directly into the same old 'PC Master Race vs. Consoles' discussion that's been around forever. There's nothing to be said on that front that hasn't been said already. Only that GB has become more PC-focused which can be awesome but also can get us stuff like this.

Avatar image for hatking
hatking

7673

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43  Edited By hatking

I was playing Just Cause 3 on my Xbox One during that conversation. It seems to perform pretty well, as far as I've noticed. The load times are noticeably long though, and it gets really frustrating between deaths or retrying the challenges.

I used to get frustrated by Brad's hyperbole with those remarks, but I'm torn now. In some way I think that he is fighting a good fight. These games should absolutely run better, at least consistent. And I fully agree with his statement about how damn frustrating it is that you can't just have your preferred platform. But, I think if he chose his words on the issue a little more carefully, it'd be easier to rally with him. It's a little alienating and dilutes the topic when I hear him say a game is unplayable while I'm literally playing it. I think that's actually part of the problem he had while making his argument during that segment.

Edit: At one point Jeff pointed something out when talking about Fallout 4. He said how his experience was ruined by so many issues, but saw other people saying they didn't see them. He compared this to the opposite experience he had with New Vegas. As he's suggesting, I think some of this stuff comes down to luck. I think that's frustrating, and something worth addressing as well.

For me, New Vegas was so bad that I eventually gave up on the side quests and just knocked out the critical path. It goes down as one of my least favorite gaming experiences in a series I otherwise love. Fallout 4 has been pretty damn stable for me, with a handful of minor bugs (mostly art bugs) and one crash. I guess we can only talk about our own experiences and hope that others are sympathetic to the frustrations we may have faced, but also don't assume people are lying when they said their experience was a positive one.

Avatar image for deathbywaffle
DeathByWaffle

780

Forum Posts

1515

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

I will say that Witcher 3 was actually surprisingly rough on PS4 when I played it. I still loved it and had a great time, but the frame rate would absolutely drop HARD during fights and even just walking around in some environments - I was surprised I never heard more about it. Ended up building my first gaming PC a couple of months later and replaying it there, which was a pretty wonderful experience.

Avatar image for superharman
Superharman

362

Forum Posts

30

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 20

Yeah, it bugged me when Brad said this too but statements like this aren't unusual for him, I still remember a podcast where he said the first Toy Story was now un-watchable. I played through Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 on the XBox One and hardly found them unplayable, if they were I wouldn't have been able to finish them let alone spend 40+ hours in both games. I'm actually struggling to find fault with Witcher 3 other than the occasional texture glitch. Fallout 4 had its frame rate drops, but again, unplayable is completely hyperbolic.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

@mike: After being well over 60 hours in on PS4 I know I have yet to notice a significant fps drop outside of one mission in a vertibird, a mission which would have sucked on PC too (not because of performance though).

Avatar image for csl316
csl316

17001

Forum Posts

765

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

I've listened to the crew hear talk about console versions being garbage, but then I'd pick up the games they referenced and be pleasantly surprised. Occasionally a game can make a poor first impression, such as Saints Row 3, but that initial shock wear's off after a few minutes. I'm of the mind that 30fps is just fine and preferable in some cases. Even an occasional dip into the 20's won't ruin an experience. But my first 3D games were on the Playstation, not some fancy PC that can run Doom and Warcraft II.

Game crashes are what I'd consider unplayable. But Nuclear Throne crashes every time I get to the last area on the Vita. EVERY TIME. Yet I keep playing it.

Avatar image for sammo21
sammo21

6040

Forum Posts

2237

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 45

#48  Edited By sammo21

@superharman: I remember when Brad berated Dan for calling someone hippy and you could tell Brad was seriously upset.

Avatar image for lawgamer
LawGamer

1481

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

I can't comment on Just Cause 3 since I haven't played it, but as far as the others go, my standard is usually whether an issue is actually preventing me from performing a fundamental action of the game as opposed to just making it more annoying or difficult to do so..

For the Witcher 3, I'd say that answer is no. The menus are a pain to navigate, sure. But they work. I can find things and equip them and use items. Not as elegantly or as quickly as I would like, but I can do it. And the framerate gets rough in some spots, but I never felt like it was affecting my ability to control Geralt or engage in combat. I never died because of the issues.

For Fallout 4, the answer is a little closer to yes. The menus suffer from a lot of the same problems as those in Witcher 3, but again it's hardly impacting the core gameplay experience. Some of the framerate issues and crashes, though? That's a different story. I was experiencing single digit framerates in some areas around Diamond City. For a shooter that makes it functionally impossible to do basic things like aiming. Having to into and out of VATS constantly isn't exactly a great solution either. Not to mention all the crashes I was experiencing kind of made it a slog. There were enough of them that I thought the game starting creeping towards the "unplayable" line.

Avatar image for facelessvixen
FacelessVixen

4009

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

  • Average frame rates in the low 20s.
  • Constant screen tearing.
  • Constant crashing.
  • DRM related issues.
  • Games that need various unofficial patches and mods in order to even start them.
  • The PC versions of Saints Row 2 and Deadly Premonition.