GearNuke: "PS4 favors comparably to the PC version and has resolution advantage over Xbox One."
I'm getting this game today, I don't even like these kinds of games but with the batman style combat and the visuals I've seen...I'm in Glad I own a ps4, I can get the definitive console version of the game. Protip: please don't think I'm saying anything is wrong with the x1 version because theres nothing wrong with it, its still the same game. Its just I like to have the best version of the game. Even if its 1 pixel better, its still better and I want the better one unless the lesser game is cheaper. That's just how I roll. Again nothing wrong with the x1 version...please don't include me in that childish argument. That's just my preference and why I ownd a lot of 3rd party games on 360 last gen.
I only Have a PS4 so I'm getting the Game for my PS4 end of story am i happy that game is 1080p and 60fps unlocked on the PS4 version hell yeah why wouldn't i be the game looks smooth as hell and beautiful.
Yes Mordor sure looks nice and the game itself seems to be a rare case of underhyped. Would've been surprised if PS4 had the inferior version, good to be on the bright side of gaming :D
60 fps unlocked? i guess u didnt even read the article. " PS4 version runs at 1080p with unlocked frame rate, which usually stays above 30 but rarely reaches 60 fps" "usually" stays above 30, sometimes dont...
It's as ringel said . . . "unlocked". From the tests they did of the game, the framerate goes all over the place. Sometimes even dipping into the thirty range. As a PC gamer, I would honestly take a locked thirty over a game that fluctuates all over the place like that. That's going to create very noticeable lag during the dips, of which there are a lot of. Good luck with that whole boasting and "smoothness" thing you have going for you. Bring on the disagrees, brought on for being straightforward enough to use logic and facts on this site when not in Sony's favor.
The game looks good. I dont think any particular user will feel disappointed if it delivers the gameplay to go along with those visuals. I know my eyes are bad (Im 41, soon to be 42) and from what i could see they all looked about the same. At first i figured they were all taken from the same source but standing in slightly different positions. good job to the dev for making such a visually appealing game across the board.
the pc elitist really go on and on. I have played so many games on Ps4 that were unlocked and enjoyed all of them which includes Infamous and never even noticed fluctuation of the frames. I then replayed Infamous locked on 30 and the experience was not anything better.
@Ringer clearly you don'the know what "unlocked 60fps" is, as it is EXACTLY what you just said. Locked means that the FPS does not move, unlocked means it can reach ___ value, but not consistently. Usually if you game runs above 30fps very consistently but rarely @60fps you have 2 choices 1. Lock it at 30fps 2. Unlock the frame rate and let it run where it runs. I prefer option one because less judder, but that certainly does not change that this game is indeed 60fps unlocked on PS4. . . That said, I am surprised how little difference there is. Looks almost exactly the same on PS4 and XB1 despite the large resolution drop.
30 fps locked is not going to seem smoother than unlocked unless they have screwed up vsync. Thats like saying halo was smoother than call of duty on xbox 360... judder comes from vsync trying to deal with frame drops, adaptive vsync and triple buffering make locking the framerate at 30 fps foolish. this is also the reason nvidia and amd are coming up with solutions to have the monitor change its refresh rate, this will cause lcd screen tearing to go away while not using vsync on the video card end.
@kevnb I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. Judder comes from irregular frame delivery times. At 30fps each frame is delivered every 33.3ms. At 60fps each frame is delivered every 16.7ms. The time between new frames is equal and this creates an even cadence to the frame delivery. When a framerate is not capped and vsynced at a factor of the refresh rate (i.e. 20fps, 30fps, 60fps on a 60Hz monitor) the frame delivery becomes highly erratic. This is because rendering loads are never equal from moment to moment or frame to frame. The result is that one frame may take 37ms while the next takes 23.8ms and so on. This uneven spacing between unique frames is what causes stutter or judder. The display panel type, whether LCD, plasma, DLP, etc, has nothing to do with either screen tearing or stutter. You can have no stutter nor screen tearing on an LCD panel just as easily as on a plasma or any other type of display. Vsync gets rid of screen tearing because it forces the hardware to only deliver a new frame each time the display refeshes. Or in the case of a vsynced 30fps, the hardware delivers one new frame followed by a duplicate of that frame, but still in sync with the refresh rate of the display. The downside to double-buffered vsync is that anytime you can't maintain 60fps (a new frame every 16.7ms) it will cause the framerate to drop down to 30fps, which is the next lowest syncable framerate. Triple buffering gets around this by keeping an extra frame in the buffer and this allows your hardware to pump out frames at whatever rate it can. But this does NOT get rid of stutter. The frame delivery will still be uneven and out of sync with the refresh rate of the display. The stutter won't be as severe as it is when jumping between 60fps and 30fps, as is the case with double-buffered vsync, but it will still result in a noticeable stutter due to the uneven delivery of unique frames. The other downside to triple buffering is that it introduces more lag. Adaptive vsync doesn't have the extra lag of triple buffered vsync and it doesn't cause your framerate to drop to 30fps if you can't maintain 60fps the way double-buffered vsync does, but the massive downside is that it results in screen tearing any time you drop below the refresh rate of your display. I personally can't stand screen tearing, so adaptive vsync is not an option for me. None of these methods completely solves the problem or is without downsides. This is why Nvidia created G-Sync. It solves all of the various problems that these other methods come with. Using traditional vsync the GPU is essentially a slave to the refresh rate of the display, but with G-Sync the refresh rate of the display basically becomes a slave to the frame delivery rate of the GPU. This allows you to take advantage of those framerates between 30fps and 60fps, but without the stutter and/or screen tearing that would normally result. I'm looking forward to getting a G-Sync monitor, but for now I virtually never leave my framerates uncapped (except maybe if it is running consistently in the 50s). If I can't maintain 60fps while maxing out all settings I will start dropping less essential settings until I can maintain it. And if that is impossible, due to bad optimization or something (which has only happened on like 2 or 3 games) and the game is running between 30fps and, say, 45fps, I will simply cap the game at 30fps. Having consistent controller response and visual feedback is way more important than averaging a higher framerate that results in jerky animation and irregular controller response.
you are probably thinking of a game with poor frametime... amd got called out for having poor frametimes in various games because of their drivers. This is why sometimes gamers will complain that they have great framerates but still feel stutter in some games. http://www.anandtech.com/sh... http://www.extremetech.com/... in short frame time variance is not a problem directly related to having a fluctuating frame rate, but in some games capping the framerate makes things look much better. And if you want vsync and cant get much over 40 fps then maybe 30 fps is a good cap, I would rather use triple buffering or hope that the engine doesnt tear too badly. here is another article that explains what they are actually looking for http://www.tomshardware.com... good drivers and good game programming go a long way to making games much smoother, this is why for many years most gamers preferred nvidia... it was just smoother.
@SlapHappyJesus All the reviews say that the PS4 version runs very smooth, no one has complained of lag or judder on the PS4 version. PS4 API is different from Diectx on PC, you do realize that, maybe not.
What kevnb said.
@kevnb You're talking about abnormal latency spikes in the delivery of individual frames. I'm pretty familiar with the subject. It's true that latency spikes in the frame delivery can sometimes cause stutter even in games that are ostensibly running at 60fps or 30fps. This happens when certain individual frames take an inordinate amount of time to be rendered, despite having your game synced and capped at 30fps or 60fps. This is usually a problem in the game engine or the graphics drivers. But anytime the frame times are varying from frame to frame you are going to get stutter. There's no way around this, except with something like G-Sync. I've seen it in every single game I have ever played on the PC over the years. Whenever you have a fluctuating framerate you are going to get stutter. That's literally what stutter is: irregular frame times. I do agree with you, though, that smooth framerates have to start at the engine and driver level. If those things aren't working properly you can get perceptible stutter even if you're maintaining a high vsynced framerate.
Just a heads up in case you havent gotten it yet but the PS4 version is LOCKED at 30fps. It isnt unlocked at all. It stays at 30fps and never drops a frame. There is no option to unlock it either. I dont know why they fed us that BS unless the review copies were different from retail copies.
i thought, "60fps unlocked" means over 60, and not "trying to achieve 60". You are using the wrong term
Nothing wrong with getting the game of your choice on the console of your choice. Sometimes this console war is so bad, we don't even talk about the game.... Screw the console war for now......what do you guys think about the game itself? Please reply if you want to share your thoughts rather than agree/disagree. I wanna hear opinions. I, for one, LOVE this game. I was obsessed with the Arkham series (especially in combat) and after all the imitations of free flow I've experienced, this one mirrors it VERY well. You can really tell the devs put some time into this game. This feels to me, like Far Cry 3 felt after playing years of Call of Duty. Very similar but different and AWESOME in it's own way. Thanks to playing Batman so much, on day 2 I'm already manipulating the camera during kills and fights to make them look even more epic. The graphics are really good, with only 1 noticeable frame rate drop. There was alot on screen at the time too so its completely forgivable. I didn't think it ran at 60 fps but certain times the animation would seem REALLY smooth, so this article explained that for me (thank you btw) other than that, the game is really smooth. Locked frame rate or not. Regardless, between the ranking of the orcs, the way they treat each other, the open land of Mordor, the combat and stealth,not to mention the bad ass that is the main character, this game gets a solid 9/10 from me. I have the PS4 version so it runs pretty solid so far. LThis should hold me over till' GTA V and Far Cry 4 no doubt
looks like you didnt read the article just because ps4 is unlocked does not mean it will be smooth. It will rarely ever hit close to 60 fps. Get a pc if you want a smooth 60 fps, console kiddies sheesh.
@ starchild Vsync just makes the gpu sync the vertical refresh rate to the horizontal refresh rate. (vertical sync) Look at your video card driver it will say "wait for vertical refresh". Screen tearing is usually when either the vertical or horizontal refresh is higher than the other. Monitors will have like a 30-80 horizontal refresh and like 55-75 vertical. Vsync causes frames to be jerky because when you drop frames it will go from like 60-30(or 45?) I never play with vsync on and I don't have any problems, games are smooth. IMO its better to have a higher framerate with vsync off than to be locked at 30 fps.
@Kingthrash360 "Its just I like to have the best version of the game" Then you should have got this on PC? http://replygif.net/i/1386.... "Protip: please don't think I'm saying anything is wrong with the x1 version because theres nothing wrong with it" Nah we know that. Your comment was really useful and we all wanted to be put at ease that you "wanted to get the definitive console version of the game".
He also said the "definitive Console Version" I think that gives him a pass. ;) Pc will always get my love, but you have to admit PS4 has been on a roll lately. No shame in giving credit where it is due.
If you don't have 6g of VRAM on your PC (like > 99% of PCs out there), you're better off getting it on PS4.
@Steampowered Oh I know. Its just that Kingthrash's post is a blatant attempt at 'rubbing' his point in. We all know the PS4 will almost always have the definitive version of multiplats. I'm just wondering whether we have to put with his posts conveying his love and affection for his platform of choice along with his laughable disclaimers putting the community at ease about his good intentions lmao. Oh you guys... http://replygif.net/i/1232.... "Again nothing wrong with the x1 version...please don't include me in that childish argument." You involved yourself in it mate. You're not fooling me :P
I would love the pc version. But i don't have 2,000-5000 too spend on a high end PC. So the PS4 version for me . As long as I can get 1080P 60fps on my PS4 I'm happy. My TV sony bravia tv is 1080P 120hz so higher resolution would be a waste. I don't understand why people are comparing High end PC with 400 consoles. That like comparing a Mustang GT vs a corvette. A corvette cost twice as much as a Mustang it should be faster. You get what you pay for. But x1 cost the same as PS4 with half the preformance. A Mustang vs a Camaro Is a good comparison . Both Mustang and Camaro are at the same price point. X1 should be closer priced to the Wiiu. X1 should be 300 without kinect 400 with kinect.
@angeljuice lol you say it like you need 6gb vram to play it on pc. its only for 4k resolution. 4gb or 3gb vram is enough for 2k and 1080p. its not like ps4 is using hi res texture pack
@internationterrorist Wrong on many fronts except for the general car comparison 1)A high end gaming PC can be built for $1000. $2000 is in the ultra category. 2)Hopefully it can get to 60fps, but this game itsn't there. Future ones will be 3)The PS4 doesn't have close to twice the performance as the X1
@Angeljuice 6GB VRAM is the recommendation for Ultra textures, but you can still put it on Ultra, but it will be more demanding. High textures are also slightly better than consoles, so don't spout bs.
Septic..... Please remove the goggles..all I stated was my opinion. I wasn't trashing the Xbox or PC. Why are you so sensitive about me happy to play this game and being happy that I can play the best version of it? Im not rubbing a point in. Smh Check my old posts and youll never see me trolling or even being bias. I don't own a x1 ...not because I'm a Sony for life type of guy but because of how ms has turned me away from it. And its price. I own every console except x1 .wiiu,3ds,vita, 360, I mean I can go on. It seems like yesterday where you could post something as neutral as I did and people would have something constructive to reply. Now all these fanboys think everything someone says is an attack on their favorite console...smmfh It seems I always have to say not to include me in this war bs because of people like you who change the subject from enjoying a game that I usually wouldnt play into something negative.
Oh i love the Xbox crusaders on here that are so sensitive. Tell me how are your crusades going? Dont blame or attack the people critiquing the xbone version or constantly saying the ps4 version is better, blame Microsoft for making the system the way it is and trying to screw everyone over with their bs anti consumer nonsense. These are just systems mate, inanimate objects, not that serious to start a crusade and try to be the defender of a video game system you hold no stocks in lol
excellent GIF, +bubbles for funny. @angeljuice PS4 isn't running this at max settings, sorry kid.
"I can get the definitive console version of the game". Don't be suckered by this
Look I know PC has the overall best game specs visuals and frame rate....but I don't PC game. I just can't afford it....yes I know there are cheap ways in building PC...but as I stated before I want the Best on the market and having the best PC is something I can't afford. So I console game. And I have the most powerful console on the market. I'm not knocking PC...its just too expensive for me.
Lmao.....That was awesome! A PS fanboy with a Disclaimer. Im not saying nothing bad about Xbox....lol
haha, naw, we just know how offended your lot gets this gen. Trying to disway the xblskulls and fanboykilla's of n4g from going mental.
@ battlefieldlover, Lol...your comeback is played out man. And i own both consoles. If my phone would let me upload a pic i just took of my gaming setup i would shut you up.. everytime i try to attach photo its just gos back top of page...but anyway back to Diablo 3 on PS4 where i do most of my gaming. Xbox One my mistress my bad bitch on the side. Lol.... Edit: i put the pic as my profile image. Xbox One on top because i could not fit in the bottom cabinet where the PS4 is. But its ok because the PS has extra protection from dust and any spillage. Have them hooked up to Asus gaming monitora and i got the logitech z323 for sound. Nothing to fancy but i can getaway from all the madness for a bit. Good gaming to everyone. BTW- i wish other so called multiconsole gamers would showoff their setups just to shut a few people up..like the ones that call you fanboys...i defend both consoles!
" Even if its 1 pixel better, its still better and I want the better one unless the lesser game is cheaper. That's just how I roll. Again nothing wrong with the x1 version...please don't include me in that childish argument. " Nice stealth troll there. BTW, someone who says "yeah, even if it 1 pixel better, that's just how I roll" is pretty laughable in itself. Still, enjoy the game. P.S.. the PC version is superior.
Lol wow...I said it my preference... Not that 1 pixel makes the game better but that if they cost the same and I have a choice imma get the best my money can buy....man , really what wrong with that. Y'all act like y'all selling games not buying them. If I pick up a gallon of milk and one gallon expires 1 day sooner than the one next to it...I'm getting the one next to it. It the exact same item for the exact price...but will last a day longer so why not get the better product???????? Its beyond me why y'all don't see what I'm saying.... Smh I'm done.
The game is enjoyable no matter which platform you decide to play it on. Monolith did a great job bring LotR back to gaming.
I like that King I own an xbox and i agree with you i like ps4 but im a xbox guy. Finally someone who does't troll keep it up (one bubble for you sir)
I totally agree with King as well. However, I only have a PS4 and pretty much buy all my games on the Ps4 and not on PC for several reasons. 1) Im no longer well verse in PC hardware. I dont know what product are out there anymore. 2) i got sick and tired of optimizing said game for the PC. 3) PC rig are expensive. I know I can build a PC on a budget but to build a pc that can play a game like this will still cost me more than $500. Might as well as get me a ps4 and save me the headache. 4) There are more games for consoles that i want to play then there are PC games. Of course everyone wants to play a game on the best performing system. but the question will be, Can you afford it and do you have the know how to build a PC that can fully take advantage of the game potential? Its like beef. Can you afford kobe beeft that goes for $300/lbs vs angus beef $6/lbs.
@kingtrash Your the same guy who was defending PS3 when it had inferior multiplats. Especially, when it was one less pixel. Sorry us gamers don't believe fanboys or hypocrisy.
Care to link those defences? Pretty sure i've been around since thrash and the guy has never trolled. But hey prove me wrong, dudes got a comment history... link away.
You included yourself in the childish argument with your comment. You were trying to appear to be the "mature gamer" but just couldn't help yourself with this "Glad I own a ps4, I can get the definitive console version of the game." Just asking for it. Very easily could have said "I'm picking this up for PS4". It's what I got it for.
I was tempted to get it on ps4, but i ended up buying it for 25gbp on ebay for a steam code.
I'm playing shadow of modor right now on my X1 and I don't think it uses the new SDK. Everygame that has used it, the three red lights on the kinect are off. Diablo and Destiny they are turned off, and they immediately turn on when you go to the home menu. Where as in mordor they are on the whole time.
"The comparison shows that the PS4 can hold favorably well against the PC version of the game" Erm the game was ported from console to PC not the other way around though, thus the need for 6GB VRAM so of course that is going to happen unless you go on ultra where PC blows them both away. You can also run the game on very high on a PC costing around the same as current gen consoles.
I feel the same way. Only I am getting the ultra pixel super unlimited frame rate definitive keepsake commemorative edition on PC. I'm so glad I own a PC and I get the ultra mega definitive version of the game. Protip: to avoid useless fanning of flames in the console wars and beyond. Just mention how happy you are to play the game. That way we don't upset people in the comments and make them feel inferior or as if they get less than everyone. After all, we are playing games and all it takes to play the best version is money. These aren't special clubs we belong to. We pay money and can play how we like. Yay gaming community.
Smh well honestly if you read the title of the article ...all I did was stay on topic. ...no?...lol wow so sensitive.... I went out of my way to let people know I don't care about the difference.. But rather what I prefer and that it was total opinion. Instead I get this ....sensitive jargon from PC and Xbox fanboys. Smh. Be a customer, not some free advertising PR advisor.
@kingthrash360 1st. I own PS4, Xbox One and a PC. 2nd. I did nothing more that state my opinion with a bit of humor. 3rd. Had you kept out "definitive edition" and maybe PS4 ( which I think is fine) nobody would have had a problem. 4th. Don't be sensitive. Its just opinion right?
I don't get it. you specifically said you wanted the best version of the game and play on a console?
No I specifically said "definitive console version".... Read again I understand PC always will have the best versions.... I also stated why i chose consoles over pc....smh
well it looks like the ps4 doesn't have the better version. Gamespot confirmed today that both the ps4 & the xbox one versions are 1080p. Xbox one is locked at 30 fps & the ps4 version is unlocked but frame rate bounces all over the place but typically right above 30 fps. I prefer a steady frame rate than one that bounces all over the place & with both being 1080p, it's the xbox one version for me. http://www.gamespot.com/vid...
I saw this as well and came here to see if anyone else knew anything about this. So far this seems to be the only site quoting this. This is good news for X1 owners if it is true, though still 900p looks really good nonetheless.
Still so many claims that the PS4 version either runs flawlessly at 60 or dips all the time. Kinda anticipating the analysis of this one.
So funny here we go again moving the goalposts. The x1 version runs sub full HD and 30fps. We don't know if it's locked at 30FPS on x1. But we do know that the x1 fanboys are already complaining that the PS4 version that is full HD 1080P 60fps is not locked. Lol lol lol;) the hypocrisy. Do you understand that even high end PC costing double or triple the cost of the PS4 drop frames or dip in frame rates. No the PS4 version is probably not locked at 1080P 60fps but what does That say about the x1 at 720p-900p 30fps.
Ah, didn't take long to see all you do is look for a reason to stir up fanboy crap. All he said is he is wondering what the final word is, but I'm sure there are a lot more soap boxes in this thread for you to find
hmm you mean dip from 120 to 60 yah maybe.. no high end PC dip from 60 to 30 for this game hell with my old 660Ti card i get above 60FPS all the time in high settings.
Grap @ hmm you mean dip from 120 to 60 yah maybe.. no high end PC dip from 60 to 30 for this game hell with my old 660Ti card i get above 60FPS all the time in high settings. Okay so high end PC doesn't dip in frame rates or have on problem with games running 1080P 60fps. Digitalfoundry benchmark "Take the PC versions of Assassin's Creed 4 or Call of Duty: Ghosts. We should reasonably assume that our current games system - a Core i7 overclocked to 4.3GHz working in concert with a Radeon R9 290X - should be able to run those games at a locked 1080p60. But it's not happening, despite a lot of time sunk into options tweakery." ASUS R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5 Radeon R9 290X 4GB 512-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card $599.99 $569.99 Intel Core i7 I7-4930K 3.4 GHz 6-core Processor - Intel&am p;am p;#1 60;Boxed - LGA2011 Socket $579.99 Directron Free shipping High end PC drop frame rates sometime lol lol lol;) dmeador + 60; 2h ago @internationterrorist Wrong on many fronts except for the general car comparison 1)A high end gaming PC can be built for $1000. $2000 . That your numbers i just list r290x high performance half the price of Nividia Titan And a CPU was over a 1200. No case, no power supply, no OS, no mouse and keyboard and no motherboard. By you " cheap" high end PC no way 1000 maybe 2,000-3000 . 1000 is 600 dollars more than a PS4. 2000 is 1600 more than a PS4. Do you understand math everyone is not willing to pay that much to play video games. Pc enthusiast stop acting like PC is so cheap.
I don't care what the Xbox fanboys say, I've always been consistently against variable framerates. When the framerate swings around a lot it produces stutter, which next to screen-tear is one of the things I hate most.
Ass creed 4 and COD Ghost are from 2 devs that have the worse optimization ever and my 4 year old $800 comp that I built was able to run both of those games very well if not better than the ps4. They may say that they have trouble getting a consent framerate but you need to know they could be running at 1440p or the max of the max settings which is way better than any console. I am not saying the ps4 is a horrible choice or anything you just have to put these things into consideration when looking at benchmarks.
Naming yourself a terrorist is enough for me. Bubble down. All versions look great. Now everyone can enjoy the game. They all play the same that's all that matter's to me. Too many people worried over a machine they don't own.
@internationterrorist To be fair, you can get a regular 290 for $399 which is more than you need for 1080P gaming anyways. You also don't need an i7 for gaming, an i5 ($250) will do just fine. But granted, it's still more expensive than a console.
My guess is it's like inFamous generally in the 30's - 40's. But rarely it pops up into the 50's - 60's when nothings going on.
The PS4 is actually locked at 30fps. The reviewers were BSing us.
Have we had a definitive answer as to.what the res and fps are on the Xbox one?
we just have to wait n see one site said its 720p at 30fps and now gearnuke said this now at 900p 30fps and same quality as the ps4. If that is true then ps4 has a technical advantage with rez and fps
720p or 900p and 30fps i bet. Its not going to be 1080p on x box 1 sadly. Rumors are the PS4 version hovers around 30fps to 40fps, you can call it an unlocked 60, but its not exactly the 60fps standard. If it ends up being 720p on xb1 that's not good. Microsoft x box 1 is not easy to develop for and its going to take a while for third party devs to get up to speed. Blizzard, Bungie and Sledgehammer all had difficulties matching the PS4 resolution and Microsoft had to step in to help them and for two of those games the resolution went from 900p to 1080p. Call of duty is still being worked on. No game should be coming out at 720p on x box 1 with the new SDK. Ryse is one of best looking games this gen and at 900p, so devs have no excuse really releasing a game thats graphically inferior at 720p. Ghost [email protected] You do know games get patched after release to improve performance right? Ryse graphics is what is important and the game had a resolution of 900p and Crytek was using not so great sdk's, think about that truly! Ryse was dropping frames because the AMD CPU clock in both consoles is weak. That's why both consoles find it tough to get a locked 60fps. That's why directx12 is so important and Microsoft knows that. Its a frame rate game changer, it will only help slightly with resolution b, to be honest its not a big help at all.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Ryse dipped below 30fps and was extremely linear. Thats why it looks so good.
KNWS. Just accept that the xbox one has problems. ESRAM DDR3 LOWER END GPU These are facts. PS4 has A much better GPU, Faster ram. As for RYSE, It hovers from 30 down to 17fps on xb1 and looks decent on an engine that's seen many upgrades. Things won't get much better for xb1, just alittle. Either it bothers you or it doesn't. At the end of the day you really should buy a console for it's exclusives and other things it offers.