Second go, first time I got like 1100 because I didn't skip anything... Fun game but inconsistent about how accurate you have to be. Some series let you get away with just the main name but others require the specific entry.
Was a little annoyed with one of the answers - they wouldn't accept Silent Hill The Room for The Room, even though I feel that should be OK.
On the other hand, this engine is designed to pump out a new frame every 16ms. Clearly it doesn't always manage it, but a drop down to single digit frame-rates would necessitate that engine taking 100ms to render the next image
Wow what an ignorant asshat.
An engine designed to produce 60fps couldn't possibly drop to 1-5fps under any circumstances?! Right!? Guys, how is this even possible? I mean, come on. I'm not pointing fingers and calling anyone a liar, but... let's just ask the question. Is Jeff Gerstman a fancy pants liar or not?
Anyway, ... I think Titanfall looks pretty awesome as far as gfx and design. I just don't like FPS comp shooters enough to break away from the other stuff I'm playing yet. Really hoping they continue on with the Titanfall stuff, maybe make a few different types of games in the universe.
Lol. You're really quoting the DF guys, people who actually know how game engines work, as ignorant asshats? Rocks, glass houses and all that.
They weren't reacting to Jeff's article. They were reacting to the massively negative thread that it prompted on places such as Neogaf. If anyone here would actually bother to read and click on the links embedded there.
He's not calling Jeff a liar - he's just asking how likely it is that the engine would drop so much. Most engines built around 60FPS tend to have drops - they discuss that in depth and prove that this is worse than most for that, but they rarely hit single digits because they have such a high overhead. Dropping 20FPS when you're running an average of 60 isn't THAT huge a problem. Dropping 20 when your max is 30 is most definitely an issue. No idea why you're taking it so personally.
I don't get why people cheese the game with magic. It just never felt satisfying for me. Sure, you still have to deal with positioning as you would in melee but it always felt like swords were what this game was designed around. There's so much to learn and so much pay off when doing so.
Not that Brad is playing it 'wrong', it's just that it's better to learn that stuff early on when the game is easier, than be forced to learn it in the late game because you had such a huge crutch to start off with.
Everything except for the Lara character model looks the same if not better on PC and I seriously would hope that character model would look better than PC if they went out of their way to to recreate it for the new consoles.
The end result will be minor but he went into a lot of details as to how it will be better. The new particle system and the higher resolution textures will be what stand out. Compared to PC the jump won't be huge and the PC will still have the edge on resolution but the PS4/X1 versions (is there an X1 version? Whatever) will have added little details here and there that will add up...slightly.
TR on PC easily runs at 60FPS on a modest rig. That's a pretty big difference besides the potential resolution increase.
You people are CRAZY. Remove the first 20 minutes of both Wall-E and Up then tell me that they deserve the top spot. Not even close. Those are by far Pixar's most inconsistent films - unable to strike a balance between heavy handed messaging and pure slapstick humour. They feel like half-measures, too scared to see if the audience would actually have the patience to sit through more than just temporary thoughtfulness so they resort to childish humour, simplistic villains and idiotic plots the moment that they feel your attention might start to waver.