Printable View
http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?t=619091
Perfect example of why Pubs and Devs don't ensure working V-Sync and AA in todays "next gen Console" games. (just one of many examples) Because gamers don't fucking care enough to boycott shitty Gaming efforts.
:?
I feel like smashing the wall after reading that thread. :mad:
Reading enough of this kind of treads has kinda desentisized me to this kind of stuff...
I can even laugh at it now.
"And before you guys say you don't notice it or don't care or it don't bug you see my sig. I am the 360 screen tearing crusader and proud of it. There is no excuse this generation for this problem other than pure laziness or incompetence in the developers. Why MS lets them publish games with vsync off and tearing is beyond me. All 360 games should have AA ,antialiasing,vsync on and minimum 30fps steady or they should be rejected till they meet those minimum specs."
This is gamer whining at its best. I'm glad I'm smarter than that.
Yikes, there's screen tearing in 360 games, wow now those are some lazy developers.
I haven't ran into games with those issues, but I do boycott bad developers, and I'm very carefull before buying a game developed/published by a company without atleast a very good track record(and will only pre-order from companies with vertually spotless records).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darklordrobert
Excuse you... are you saying the gamer who shells out his money for the P3 or 360 shouldn't expect working AA & V-Sync in their "next gen" games? :|
No, I do want my "next gen" game to look and perform as best as possible of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
But if an otherwise good game suffers from screen tearing or anything else I wouldn't let it bother me.
Calling yourself a screen tearing crusader seems a bit over the top for me.
I'm always more concerned about the gameplay then anything else in a game, if these things really affect gameplay I to would complain.
People like you are keeping the Gaming Standards LOW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darklordrobert
Thanks a lot for not caring about standards.... good job. :|
Do you even understand the irony of your two statements?
"next gen" and Tearing/Jaggies don't mix.
If it wasn't for people like you, we'd have 100% V-sync and AA in todays Console games. thks, again
Depends on what trade-offs they are willing to accept. The PS3 and XBox 360 were powerhouses when they came out, but are fairly low-end by today's standards. If the detail needed for a game screen means you can't hold at least 60 FPS at all times, you either drop down to 30 FPS or accept tearing. There's simply no way around that (50 and 25 for PAL TVs). Many players would rather have 58 FPS and tearing than 30 FPS and vsync.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
If you want 60 FPS (or better) all the time, you need to sacrifice something... AA being one of the more commonly sacrificed time-consumers. Maybe you need to remove certain lighting effects, or limit the draw distance, or limit the number of objects in frame. The issue is that many of these games today are developed around a modern HIGH-END PC (to drive the PC market forward) where they don't need to make those trade-offs. Then when the game gets ported to the 360 or PS3, they have to deal with the consequences of a less powerful system.
The current generation of consoles aren't equipped to run at HD resolutions without a hitch, most games run at 30FPS or less.They pushed this "HD" craze forward, and they themselves can barely keep up.Only PC can pump out good HD.You will have to wait for the next generation of consoles to get 60 FPS, AA, and VSync.
Haha, you expect high resolution 60fps without screen tearing in the next generation of consoles? No, they'd still rather just sacrifice that in favor of pumping out more shiny vaseline effects, like they always do. And you still won't have any options to change it.
Conjecture and nothing more. Lack of V-Sync is UNNACCEPTABLE... there is no amount of reasoning to not have it. If a game can't be designed/ported to the P3&360 with adequate frame rates and V-Sync enabled, then the game simply needs to be cancelled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chilly Willy
Gorgeous engine with no V-Sync = FUGLY:!:
There are ZERO excuses and I'm SICK of seeing people make them for Sony and Microsoft. They either need to invest in figuring out how to enable Triple Buffering for titles that struggle for frames and V-Sync simultaneously... that or don't realse the goddamn game! It's real simple.
That's all just YOUR opinion. I myself would rather have 58 FPS and tearing than 30 FPS, especially on a FPS. Those 28 extra FPS can mean the difference between fragging and being fragged.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
You can't cancel a popular game conversion just because you can't make it 60 FPS and look the same as a modern high-end PC - you'd be out of business in a month. You have to make the best conversion possible with what you have. It's been that way since the 2600.
That's just ridiculous. You're like, personally attacking this guy. I agree with both of you to an extent, yeah there should be more quality control, I'm seeing more bugs in games lately myself, but I can look past alot if the game is good as long as it isn't a critical flaw, like a game save glitch or something that gets you stuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
Where would we be if nintendo was like "hey, zelda has slowdown, double dragon has flicker, we can't release those." You saying people like us is keeping the standards low is like me saying people like you is why i don't have the games that i want on live arcade.
See, I would rather them spend less money on AA and high intensity lighting and more money throwing old games on the marketplace, learning how to emulate saturn, or making fresh new retro games like scott pilgrim or mega man 9/10. Yeah sometimes when I'm playing a game and the framerate dips I get annoyed, but do I want them to hold the game back and risk it being unreleased for the sake of a few fps? Hell no. Besides, there's not much they can't fix later with an update patch these days.
Seriously? I thought Darklordrobert's explanation was absolutely satisfactory. Who are you to talk down to him and lay the quality of games blame on him?Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
I agree that a lack Vsync, AA and triple buffering sucks, but it basically boils down to this.Companies can make weaker games and have them run at 60 FPS, AA, etc, or they can make it be "pretty"(and I use that term loosely),and have it run like crap.You cant expect the PS3/360 to pump out the graphics it does now at with all those features, because it can barely do games at 720P.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool
Oh I can't... :daze:Quote:
Originally Posted by kokujin
Is it just me or am I the ONLY guy in the world that has noticed that Sony and Microsoft offered two next gen systems that "were supposed to be capable" of PC quality graphics for
1. Less hassle
2. Cheaper in the longrun
3. "same" quality as top notch PC gaming
but have instead only offered a fraction of what they said they could offer?
So basically... I get it now I think. Everyone who was "gun ho" about the P3 and 360 stood behind those companies back then, and now that the proof is in the pudding (most Console games are being butchered), people have decided to simply sweep the issue under the rug by making excuse after excuse for these two companies.
They promised Next Gen gaming, guys... WHERE THE HELL is it:?: :!:
I'd rather your opinion didn't count because if that were the case, we'd have V-Sync and AA in 100% of todays Console games. Sadly, opinions like yours are what matters to M. and S. because if they actually had to answer to gamers who had real standards, they'd have to either come with it (ensure high quality across the board) OR go the fuck out of business. Instead, clowns who don't care about important Technical Processing have more influence in the creation of games than those who do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chilly Willy
It's thanks to individuals like yourself for todays Mediocrity.
cheers :|