Xbox one GTA V.....is it just me?

[p1stonhead]

Digby said:

It's not just about what you see, it's about how it feels.Anyone saying it won't make much difference, isn't much of a gamer I'm afraid.You sit very much in the 'that will do' camp.For those like myself, it won't do.It is horrible.It is old.We were promised so much more and they don't seem to be delivering.There is nothing next gen about 30 fps.If you could choose the option after trying both, you would never EVER go back to 30 fps.

Btw, GTA was quite an achievement for a console, I agree, on the Xbox 360! As for the PC cost debate, my machine is quite old now.I run SLi and the cards are probably worth £100 each.The rest needed to make them work probably £200 to £300.It's not far off the price of a console, yet it still runs rings around the Xbox one.

60 vs 30.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n00qUDL0Cxg


https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

As for youtube and 60 fps, do you just mean you select HD? If you right click and show the properties, most HD vids I watch rarely go above 40 fps.

There is also a push towards higher frame rates in cinema etc.The same reasons apply and the results are just as impressive.

http://player.vimeo.com/video/40316231

As I say, I'm not bashing console gaming as I have loved almost every moment of my voyage and imported almost all of them to get them first (cost me a fortune, too!) , but this isn't next-gen.

By 'next gen' do you just mean current gen? Coz the PS4/XB1 have been out for 18 months and we have what we have. Its current console technology. PC is always ahead of consoles by a few years depending on what you wanna spend.

[Digby]

p1stonhead said:

PC is always ahead of consoles by a few years depending on what you wanna spend.

It wasn't always.Consoles showed up the PC's for a time.3DFX changed that for most.

Anyway, next-gen, current gen, call it what you like, they made some big promises and can't deliver them all.Even the Playstation 1 from 20 years ago had some 60 fps games

[Mastodon2]

Digby said:

It wasn't always.Consoles showed up the PC's for a time.3DFX changed that for most.

Anyway, next-gen, current gen, call it what you like, they made some big promises and can't deliver them all.Even the Playstation 1 from 20 years ago had some 60 fps games

There's plenty of them on ebay, why not buy one?

[Digby]

At least it delivered what it promised, huh? But then if it hadn't, there would obviously have been those ready to defend its shortcomings regardless.

[Dare2Fail]

Digby said:

It's not just about what you see, it's about how it feels.Anyone saying it won't make much difference, isn't much of a gamer I'm afraid.You sit very much in the 'that will do' camp.For those like myself, it won't do.It is horrible.It is old.We were promised so much more and they don't seem to be delivering.There is nothing next gen about 30 fps.If you could choose the option after trying both, you would never EVER go back to 30 fps.

Btw, GTA was quite an achievement for a console, I agree, on the Xbox 360! As for the PC cost debate, my machine is quite old now.I run SLi and the cards are probably worth £100 each.The rest needed to make them work probably £200 to £300.It's not far off the price of a console, yet it still runs rings around the Xbox one.

60 vs 30.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n00qUDL0Cxg


https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/


As for youtube and 60 fps, do you just mean you select HD? If you right click and show the properties, most HD vids I watch rarely go above 40 fps.

There is also a push towards higher frame rates in cinema etc.The same reasons apply and the results are just as impressive.

http://player.vimeo.com/video/40316231

As I say, I'm not bashing console gaming as I have loved almost every moment of my voyage and imported almost all of them to get them first (cost me a fortune, too!) , but this isn't next-gen.

Your PC costs between £400 and £500. Or, to put it another way 133% to 166% of the cost of an XBOne. That's quite a big pricing difference in percentage terms.

[Digby]

I play it on a £700 TV if it helps?

[Oakey]

Digby said:

It's not just about what you see, it's about how it feels.Anyone saying it won't make much difference, isn't much of a gamer I'm afraid.You sit very much in the 'that will do' camp.For those like myself, it won't do.It is horrible.It is old.We were promised so much more and they don't seem to be delivering.There is nothing next gen about 30 fps.If you could choose the option after trying both, you would never EVER go back to 30 fps.

Btw, GTA was quite an achievement for a console, I agree, on the Xbox 360! As for the PC cost debate, my machine is quite old now.I run SLi and the cards are probably worth £100 each.The rest needed to make them work probably £200 to £300.It's not far off the price of a console, yet it still runs rings around the Xbox one.

60 vs 30.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n00qUDL0Cxg


https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

As for youtube and 60 fps, do you just mean you select HD? If you right click and show the properties, most HD vids I watch rarely go above 40 fps.

There is also a push towards higher frame rates in cinema etc.The same reasons apply and the results are just as impressive.

http://player.vimeo.com/video/40316231

As I say, I'm not bashing console gaming as I have loved almost every moment of my voyage and imported almost all of them to get them first (cost me a fortune, too!) , but this isn't next-gen.

The problem is because the previous gen lasted around 8 years you've been spoiled by being way ahead of consoles by having a decent PC. You've already seen what 'next gen' has to offer. However, to most non PC gamers, this current gen is next gen.

60fps is great and all, I regularly game in 60fps on my PC, but it's not a deal breaker if a console game is 30fps. Driveclub is still a stunning game for example and plays brilliantly. Likewise The Order supposedly looks fantastic.

And Youtube offers 60fps on videos now, the option isn't there on regular IE but it's available on Chrome and IE11. The quality setting will show '60' next to the 720p or 1080p if it's available as 60fps.

[Digby]

I only kept mentioning 60 fps because we were told numerous times this would be the case on these consoles.That to me is the absolute minimum to transform the playability, feel and look of a game (especially fpshooters and racers).I think Forza 5 is 60 fps and doing one lap of a track alone on that compared to any other 30 fps racer would show you the difference.

It's true I have been used to 100+ FPS for probably a decade or more on the PC, but I would have been happy with a solid 60 on the latest consoles.Even certain game manufacturers led us on with promises of 1080p and 60 fps.Then we ended up with 792p and 30 fps! That to me is like dropping your computers refresh rate to 60hz or less (try it and drag some windows around - it's horrid!)

Roll on the next next-gen..

[Oakey]

To be fair, you did pick the less powerful of the two

[Digby]

So it seems

I'm using Firefox, so I assume that's why I don't see the 60 fps option on youtube.I just love all the tracking and advert blocking freebies you can install with it.I don't see adverts anywhere now and that was especially annoying on youtube!

[Oakey]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2014/10/30...