@ghostiet: Thanks but yeah that strikes me more as an NVIDIA promotional thing than an actual WB or Rocksteady backed piece of press saying 'this will run at 60 and we guarantee it.' You're right that it also seems more like a video captured and messed around with to hit youtube's 60fps requirements than anything else, the audio is a little messed up.
Just curious, but did they ever promise uncapped or higher framerate? Most of the complaints seem to be centered around how it being inexplicably locked at 30 is totally unacceptable, but I don't really see why that's an issue beyond the entitlement of people who have spent thousands of pounds on a monster PC.
Like, if they promised 60 and delivered 30, sure, that's annoying. But if it was never mentioned and the argument is that it 'just shouldn't' be at 30 then that's kind of stupid.
When all it takes to change the frame rate is editing a .ini file its not a big deal logistically. But its just one more thing that showcases the lack of effort and half-baked nature of the port.
Sure all it takes for the consumer to change the framerate is to mess around with registry files (which isn't... really a good idea anyway) but I have to assume that there were technical reason for the locked framerate. People complaining about performance issues after going in and changing .ini files are doing the equivalent of buying a car, immediately removing the spark plugs and complaining that it won't start and it seems a little juvenile to me. Sure there are people having legit problems with it not starting or crashing and so on, and those are problems that should have been caught and need addressed. But the majority of people complaining seem to think a port job is as simple as opening Unreal and going to File > Export > Make PC version and it all just seems kind of silly.
Just curious, but did they ever promise uncapped or higher framerate? Most of the complaints seem to be centered around how it being inexplicably locked at 30 is totally unacceptable, but I don't really see why that's an issue beyond the entitlement of people who have spent thousands of pounds on a monster PC.
Like, if they promised 60 and delivered 30, sure, that's annoying. But if it was never mentioned and the argument is that it 'just shouldn't' be at 30 then that's kind of stupid.
@thomasnash: My point of reference is actually my trawl of Amazon for new releases every so often and while they do seem to drop relatively quickly most things like the Witcher seem to come in at £50 or so on launch. Maybe I am totally wrong! I don't buy things on release that often anyway.
People may be passing over the fact that £40 is not what a new game costs in the UK unless you're buying the PC DVD or it's Nintendo first party, a new retail game usually costs £55 - £60, which is the equivalent of apparently $95. Destiny's limited edition with season pass on release was something like £90, which is equivalent to $140. Meaning someone who has bought everything for Destiny from release in the UK will have been charged the equivalent of about $200 and is still apparently not getting everything available.
It's a stupid system, especially when people talk about the value of a $60 game. Would you buy the same $60 game if it was $90? Hell no, and definitely not if they keep up practices like this.
Log in to comment