Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pathetic port from such a great dev

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pathetic port from such a great dev

    Hi Remedy,

    I always loved the games you make, very good story and gameplay.
    But i consider the Quantum Break port a pathetic thing to do to PC gamers for several reason:

    - No quit button, seriously? a PC game without a quit button!! lame
    - Scale resolution stuff, not running at the default monitor res. (we are running high-end GPU's, what makes you guys think we need this gimmick??)
    - Pop-up textures even with SSD's
    - All over the place frame time which leads to sever [FONT=Open Sans]over-aiming and imput-lag.

    And i'm not even going to bring up all the Windows Store limitation.

    I have not doubt that this will get fixed in the future, but here is the problem. I will finish the game until you fix it and that is a situation no customer should have to deal with.
    When you play a game for the first time you should enjoy it properly then, not after 1 year when (if) you replay it.
    When you create a product make sure it meats a standard otherwise don't release it or release it after you fix the problems.

    This is the last game i will buy from you guys, you lost a customer.

    Have a nice day.
    Alex.[/FONT]
    Last edited by geutz; 04-10-2016, 01:32 PM.

  • #2
    Yes, every game should work perfectly right out the gate.
    As should every graphics driver... and every piece of PC hardware should work out of the box as well... but it doesn't happen that way.

    You make it sound as if you've never played a great game that was in poor condition at release before.
    But, not every developer gets the time or resources to deliver a game how it should be. Sometimes they do the best they can with what they have.
    Games like Vampire: Bloodlines, Dark Messiah... hell, even the first Deus Ex released with major performance issues and other bugs. But, people still loved these games at release.
    And what about STALKER, almost any game from Bethesda.....

    Yes, in a "perfect world"... but this is not. And games will be released with issues, and as hardware grows, and technology and software becomes more intricate, the possibility for issues grows as well.

    Also, they lost a customer?
    Really? Because of one flawed port. A port, that wouldn't even make the top twenty worst ports. Sorry, but with this being Remedy's fifth game ever and it's first release with issues, you're not going to buy from them ever again.
    That's pretty close minded and a bit... childish. No offense intended. But, by that mind set, you can't buy a game from any studio. As every one out there have released at least one game with problems.

    Comment


    • #3
      Damien, this trend is starting to be seen in all dev's so it's not like it's the first time. And i don't see your logic here, once you know you have a faulty product, how can you as a company, permit for that product to be launched and sold. People are paying for this, if it's not in a good condition it shouldn't be sold.

      Seriously, stop taking their side, it's a mistake. How come there are developers that never had this issue before? Because does dev's care about customers. I'm sorry but neither Remedy or Microsoft do, regarding this product.

      Comment


      • #4
        How about... no.
        I'll continue to defend a developer I like. A studio that has deliver time and time again great games, with amazing stories and enjoyable gameplay.
        And because of their amazing history, I'll defend them and give them time to improve Quantum Break.

        So, I'll keep taking their side.
        I'm not going to abandon a great developer because of one disappointing PC port. Thanks though.


        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Damien_Azreal View Post
          How about... no.
          I'll continue to defend a developer I like. A studio that has deliver time and time again great games, with amazing stories and enjoyable gameplay.
          And because of their amazing history, I'll defend them and give them time to improve Quantum Break.

          So, I'll keep taking their side.
          I'm not going to abandon a great developer because of one disappointing PC port. Thanks though.


          It seems weird to me that you would just blindly defend them. Remedy did have a pretty solid track record but unfortunately this can’t be added to that illustrious record. A product has to be taken on its own merits and as it stands this retail product is broken, not fit for purpose and it should be judged as such. To sit back and defend them for releasing a poor product under the hope that it may be fixed in the future doesn’t change the fact that it is broken today.

          Comment


          • #6
            Only, it isn't "broken".
            Performance is disappointing. But, I've finished the game completely on Win10 with no crashes, no lock ups, no issues starting or running it.
            And I'm half-way through my second play-through and I've gotten it running smoother. And still, no issues or problems at all.

            I know there are people running into problems, and I feel bad for them. But, for me personally, I've been able to play what is an excellent and amazing game. I hope for performance improvements and driver updates.
            But, I'm not "blindly" defending them. My experience, while a little disappointing, was not bad. It's an amazing game, one definitely worthy of Remedy's history and style.
            I am taking the product for it's own merits based on my personal experiences while playing it.

            And, Remedy have always followed through with updating and fixing games. They've already released one update, and Lauri has stated they are working on more. There's zero reason to think the game wouldn't receive updates.
            Every Win10 game (Tomb Raider, Gears, Quantum.... ) have gotten updates and fixes. So MS are not stopping them from doing so.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Damien_Azreal View Post
              Only, it isn't "broken".
              Performance is disappointing. But, I've finished the game completely on Win10 with no crashes, no lock ups, no issues starting or running it.
              And I'm half-way through my second play-through and I've gotten it running smoother. And still, no issues or problems at all.

              I know there are people running into problems, and I feel bad for them. But, for me personally, I've been able to play what is an excellent and amazing game. I hope for performance improvements and driver updates.
              But, I'm not "blindly" defending them. My experience, while a little disappointing, was not bad. It's an amazing game, one definitely worthy of Remedy's history and style.
              I am taking the product for it's own merits based on my personal experiences while playing it.

              And, Remedy have always followed through with updating and fixing games. They've already released one update, and Lauri has stated they are working on more. There's zero reason to think the game wouldn't receive updates.
              Every Win10 game (Tomb Raider, Gears, Quantum.... ) have gotten updates and fixes. So MS are not stopping them from doing so.

              The age old "It works on my machine". The game is great, but the PC port is beyond shocking. A PC game unable to play at 60fps/1080p is abysmal. Frame timing is all over the shop making it run worse than the xbox. Sure they might release updates but you have no way of saying if those updates will merit any benefits in the long run. I mean how much performance will they be able to crank out without a considerable rewrite of how the engine works? Nobody but the developers at Remedy can comment on that. Hell i remember thinking that with enough updates Arkham Knight could be fixed until the devs came out and basically said "We cant fix it". So with that in mind im far more pessimistic for the future of this port (though i would love to be proven wrong).

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, it's the "age old" statement.
                Because really, that's all I can use to comment on. I'm not going to try and speak for everyone, or try and use experiences other people are posting as a means of furthering my opinion.
                It's mine. Based on my playtime with the game. And that's all I can use to form my opinion.

                And, a good chunk of performance issues are not simply tied to the port itself. AMD are getting far better performance then Nvidia due to Nvidia's poor DX12 support.
                The newest beta Vulkan drivers are already showing improvements in DX12 support, so... there's always the possibility that new drivers can improve things as well.

                But even so, this is FAR from the worst port ever, as far too many are trying to claim.
                It's not even one of the worst ports in the past few years. But, every year, there's a "worst PC port ever!!!!" game. Sorry, I guess I'm just not jaded enough it seems.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Damien_Azreal View Post
                  Yes, it's the "age old" statement.
                  Because really, that's all I can use to comment on. I'm not going to try and speak for everyone, or try and use experiences other people are posting as a means of furthering my opinion.
                  It's mine. Based on my playtime with the game. And that's all I can use to form my opinion.

                  And, a good chunk of performance issues are not simply tied to the port itself. AMD are getting far better performance then Nvidia due to Nvidia's poor DX12 support.
                  The newest beta Vulkan drivers are already showing improvements in DX12 support, so... there's always the possibility that new drivers can improve things as well.

                  But even so, this is FAR from the worst port ever, as far too many are trying to claim.
                  It's not even one of the worst ports in the past few years. But, every year, there's a "worst PC port ever!!!!" game. Sorry, I guess I'm just not jaded enough it seems.
                  A port that streams video for the TV episodes when the Microsoft servers can't even handle that and upscales everything to 1080p making the game appear blurry does not a good port make. I'm currently running on the EXACT System recommended for Ultra settings and this is one of the worst ports I've seen its not Arkham or Mortal Kombat X level of bad but from a developer who knows how to make good PC ports I expected a hell of a lot better.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I found that disabling the in game AA option helps a LOT.
                    The temporal AA used in game makes the game looks a lot blurrier and really hurts the image. Turning it off and forcing FXAA through NCP makes the game look much, much, much better.

                    I'm also forcing 16xAF through the NCP.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      now I find this post...made a thread about my findings (mostly that the CP settings don't really seem to work, & the in-game AA is actually pretty damn good)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Matter of opinion.
                        But, I personally disliked the temporal AA used by the in game setting, and found that turning it off... to me personally... improved the visual quality.

                        FXAA, when forced through a CP won't show up in a screenshot.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Damien_Azreal View Post
                          Matter of opinion.
                          But, I personally disliked the temporal AA used by the in game setting, and found that turning it off... to me personally... improved the visual quality.

                          FXAA, when forced through a CP won't show up in a screenshot.

                          Agreed. The in game AA looked terrible to me. Once disabled, it improved my performance by a large margin and I was able to bump the resolution up from 1080 to 1440.
                          Last edited by popcornuk; 04-11-2016, 12:47 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Damien_Azreal View Post
                            Matter of opinion.
                            But, I personally disliked the temporal AA used by the in game setting, and found that turning it off... to me personally... improved the visual quality.

                            FXAA, when forced through a CP won't show up in a screenshot.
                            I'm just using printscreen; why wouldn't it show up? still going to double check tho, thanks.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by popcornuk View Post


                              Agreed. The in game AA looked terrible to me. Once disabled, it improved my performance by a large margin and I was able to bump the resolution up from 1080 to 1440.
                              Yeah. It, like many things is just opinion.
                              As I personally will disable motion blur right out of the gate in every game that gives me the option. I personally think motion blur always looks terrible. No matter how it's done.
                              But, I know plenty of people that like it.

                              So, I'm sure some will like the in game AA option for QB. Just, to me, I think it hurts the overall image of the game.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X