Something went wrong. Try again later
Giant Bomb is under new ownership. Log in now to accept new terms and conditions and transfer your account to the new owner!

Sooty

This user has not updated recently.

8193 306 131 102
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Sooty's forum posts

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

@sooty said:

Is this potentially the worst console launch in history? 8 years later, and games are running at 720P, the resolution every 360 game came out of the gate with. I just don't understand how this can happen, consumer level PC hardware has been capable of 1920x1200 for at least 7 years on individual video cards.

What on earth is going on with this system? This can't just a case of bad optimisation or not figuring the console out, it is simply poor, there is no good reason that the resolution bump from 1280x720 to 1920x1080 is not possible. I don't even gain much FPS if I change games from 1080P down to 720P on PC games.

Okay, first of all plenty of Xbone games are running 1080p. In fact the only 1080p 60fps game I can think of this gen so far is Forza. Maybe Ghosts, but the PS4 version apparently has performance issues so that doesn't really count.

Second of all, most Xbox 360 games were running at around 540 pixels early on. Why do you think aliasing was such a shitshow on 360/PS3 especially early on? Hell I think 540 pixels was a STEP UP FROM PREVIOUS GAMES for MW2. That means previous games were running even lower than 540p.

A lot of games didn't run at native 720p last generation. And remember what the launch games looked like on the 360? Pretty piss poor. You should at least get your facts straight before you call this the worst console launch in history because of the resolution/framerate a single game runs at. That is just silly. Dead Rising ran like shit last generation as well. If you think that DR3 is the perfect example of technical ability of any console, you are woefully uninformed. Also, a lot of games drop frames like that when crazy shit happens. Usually when everything is exploding, you don't NEED the framerate to be crazy high so it's really not the end of the world as long as it's very brief (like during the flamethrower stuff we saw in the GB video).

And please tell me how drops to 25fps and the occasional (and questionably measured) more extreme drops that last little more than a moment can't possibly be poor optimization? Have you played Far Cry 3 on 360? 25fps is the MAX framerate most of the time you're doing anything, and 16fps isn't something you hit for a brief moment, it's something entire sections run at.

And What is it with people saying the game doesn't look good? I think, for what it is and what it does, it looks pretty good. A hell of a lot better than even the PC versions of past games and WAYYYYY better than the console versions. The characters actually look pretty good, the environments look fine, there are a ton of zombies and the lighting/effects are pretty good too. You know what else has the occasionally AWFUL texture? Battlefield 4. A couple moments in Campaign I came on a few really terrible ones. Still a great looking game. DR3 isn't a hell of a looker, and it's poorly optimized, but it looks better than a current gen game by plenty. Don't believe me? Go pull up a screenshot of the 360 version of DR2, especially a cut scene showing a character or something. Then go boil your head for exaggerating the lack of difference between generations. No shit it doesn't look as good as GTA V, DR games have never been technical powerhouses beyond the number of things on screen. And by the way, GTA V drops frames plenty especially when it matters in my experience.

I've never seen a post of such utter bullshit or someone take such extreme liberties with what I'm saying.

I do remember what launch 360 games looked like, Perfect Dark Zero and Gun are not the only games that came out which is why I have said repeatedly that Call of Duty 2 and Condemned looked pretty fucking good as launch games. Don't bother with anymore of your bollocks plz.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#3  Edited By Sooty

Wait this is Insomniac developed and there's not a dime of info or advertising behind it? Really?

I thought it was some shitty f2p spin-off or something.

I'm not surprised Resistance got shunned, the first game was very run of the mill, the second had awesome co-op which they removed from 3. They were also very hit and miss, sometimes looking great and then awful.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#4  Edited By Sooty

GTX 670s have hit dirt cheap levels recently too, if you can get 2 of those at a stupidly low price it'd be pretty sweet.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#5  Edited By Sooty

@sasnake said:

I laugh at people who think launch titles are going to push the consoles to their limits, or make the most of the hardware...I laugh indeed.

I don't think anyone is saying that these games are pushing them to their limits, or that the console is totally worked out, but it's still worrying. 1080P on one, 720P on the other, and then games like this. It's not making a good first impression like the 360 did, as I still stand by Condemned and Call of Duty 2 as being big step ups over the original Xbox and even matching PC at the time.

If this was a current gen game people would be shitting all over it, the argument "oh it's a launch game" doesn't mean a lot when it's still failing to run smoothly at 720P, a resolution consoles started using 8 years back.

edit: Oh my...

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#6  Edited By Sooty

I like the PS3 beep!

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

I know it's necro but I blame indie devs for oversaturating the market with 2D platformers and side scrollers, for $10-15 or less. It's giving people the idea that games like this are only worth that amount.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

It probably won't look any better on next gen, but it's nice to have the option. (I'm assuming it already runs in 1080P)

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

@sooty said:

@artisanbreads said:

@sooty said:

@artisanbreads said:

@bisonhero said:

It's super adorable that people are analyzing launch games to death, as if their graphical quality is in any way indicative of the console's overall capabilities. We're going to need way more than a few launch games to get an overall sense of what developers are able to do with each console.

It never got any better than Perfect Dark so this is totally valid. Bro.

Perfect Dark was terrible in every way, not just because it was a launch game. Call of Duty 2 and Condemned were pretty damn impressive at the time, but that was 8 years ago at 720P. It's silly that we are still at that resolution now on the successor, that is my issue here for the 500 bones.

Okay? Don't buy this game?

There are games at 1080p on Xbox One (the aforementioned 2K14) so lets so where it goes from here. Games got way better looking as the last gen went on, why wouldn't they here?

As it has been said a basketball game is obviously quite different to anything else, or most others would be at 1080 too most likely, I guess. They will get better, but still, to say this is not worrying and profoundly disappointing is just a lie. It makes me wonder how big the gap will actually get between the two systems if this is happening at launch.

I guess I was hoping they would be much closer than this.

I am not profoundly disappointed. This is not a lie. It's a launch of a video game console. Lets see where it is in the future.

It's not just a launch thing that makes it bad, it's bad because it is considerably worse than the cheaper, competing console. That's just embarrassing.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

102

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

@sooty said:

@artisanbreads said:

@bisonhero said:

It's super adorable that people are analyzing launch games to death, as if their graphical quality is in any way indicative of the console's overall capabilities. We're going to need way more than a few launch games to get an overall sense of what developers are able to do with each console.

It never got any better than Perfect Dark so this is totally valid. Bro.

Perfect Dark was terrible in every way, not just because it was a launch game. Call of Duty 2 and Condemned were pretty damn impressive at the time, but that was 8 years ago at 720P. It's silly that we are still at that resolution now on the successor, that is my issue here for the 500 bones.

Okay? Don't buy this game?

There are games at 1080p on Xbox One (the aforementioned 2K14) so lets so where it goes from here. Games got way better looking as the last gen went on, why wouldn't they here?

As it has been said a basketball game is obviously quite different to anything else, or most others would be at 1080 too most likely, I guess. They will get better, but still, to say this is not worrying and profoundly disappointing is just a lie. It makes me wonder how big the gap will actually get between the two systems if this is happening at launch.

I guess I was hoping they would be much closer than this.