Just Cause 3 can drop to 17fps on Xbox One, suffer 15 minute load times. PS4 Also has issues.

[poopman234]

[url]http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/just_cause_3/news/just_cause_3_can_drop_to_17fps_on_xbox_one_suffer_15_minute_load_times_report.html[/url]

[QUOTE]The Xbox One version of Just Cause 3 suffers from significant memory leak issues, according to an early technical test from NX Gamer, leading to "incredibly long load times" and problems with the game's AI and physics during extended play sessions.

In fact, playing the game for more than an hour at a time can lead to load times of up almost 15 minutes and issues with the game's performance, with the framerate said to drop as low as 17 frames per second.[/QUOTE]

What the fuck? This is unplayable! Apparantly PS4 isn't that much better, according to [url]http://www.ps4pro.eu/blog/2015/11/29/just-cause-3-big-issues-with-the-ps4-port/[/url]

[QUOTE]First off, there are some huge loading times. It might load anywhere between 30 and 120 seconds. No joke, you might have to wait for two entire minutes, if you die and have to reload the game! That’s going to be a huge annoyance if these reports are going to be proven true.

That’s just one thing; the other big problem is the framerate. It’s barely able to stay on thirty frames per second, and it’s dropping every time there’s an explosion – and seeing how explosions are traditional in Just Cause games, it’s going to be noticeable.

Apparently this is present despite installing a day-1 patch. If these are both going to be proven true, it’s going to be a huge failure for Avalanche![/QUOTE]

So it looks like if you play on consoles, you may want to skip this one. Unfortunately for me, that's what I am on :(, oh well, this should encourage me to get that gaming pc at some point, lol.

[Bathtub]

i don't know whether to be mad that current gen consoles are so weak, or that so many of these games are horribly optimized, or both

[chenhonkster]

and people dropped on pc version to play on consoles yet under minimum-spec computers could run it on high at a nice 30-60 fps apparently

[Nahash]

How did the devs mess up so badly?

[itisjuly]

[QUOTE=Bathtub;49215219]i don't know whether to be mad that current gen consoles are so weak, or that so many of these games are horribly optimized, or both[/QUOTE]
It's mostly due to horrible optimization. Current gen consoles are more than capable of handling JC3 if it was properly optimized.

[HumanAbyss]

Apparently the game runs on high on a 660 GTX, which is below the minimum specs.

This is the inverse of Arkham Knight, an apparently great PC port and a bad console port.

[Cmdr0ddball]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49215243]Apparently the game runs on high on a 660 GTX, which is below the minimum specs.

This is the inverse of Arkham Knight, an apparently great PC port and a bad console port.[/QUOTE]

Not to sound like I'm anti-console or anything, but I am completely okay with this.

[Valiantttt]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49215243]Apparently the game runs on high on a 660 GTX, which is below the minimum specs.

This is the inverse of Arkham Knight, an apparently great PC port and a bad console port.[/QUOTE]
Avalanche generally has great PC releases but most gaming PC's have decent CPU's, the main problem is that the consoles have pretty fucking awful CPU, as showcased that the actual explosions etc. won't cause slowdown BUT when the CPU has to work(physics in terms of many objects dividing into more objects and slowdown in city areas) the game slows down.

Just a result of poor choice of hardware for the current-gen consoles. Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to use 2 low-end tablet/laptop CPU's pasted together with 1/2 cores locked off. The GPU isn't even the main bottleneck in this case.
Of course, it is also that the consoles were outdated and not sold with a loss at launch causing them to have poor hardware for lower costs. Last gen it was different because at launch they were sold at a big loss but you got a good device at launch for it.

EDIT: Here is the video of the Xbox One performance
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU9fK5LxoTc[/media]

[Xmeagol]

Don't play in consoles you plebs

[Rockman1811]

FUCK. I have a PS4. Any mention of the Frame Rate on PS4?

[Hyperbole]

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49215261]Avalanche generally has great PC releases but most gaming PC's have decent CPU's, the main problem is that the consoles have pretty fucking awful CPU, as showcased that explosions etc. won't cause slowdown BUT when the CPU has to work(physics in terms of many objects dividing into more objects and slowdown in city areas) the game slows down.

Just a result of poor choice of hardware for the current-gen consoles. Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to use 2 low-end tablet/laptop CPU's pasted together with 1/2 cores locked off. The GPU isn't even the main bottleneck in this case.[/QUOTE]

To be fair, it'd be a miracle if a game like JC3 ran properly on the hardware in the current gen consoles. Not sure what people were expecting to be honest.

[Makol]

[QUOTE=Megaman1811;49215286]FUCK. I have a PS4. Any mention of the Frame Rate on PS4?[/QUOTE]

Just as bad as it is on the Xbone.

Got an early copy and it's pretty unplayable most of the time.

[Curls]

[QUOTE=Bathtub;49215219]i don't know whether to be mad that current gen consoles are so weak, or that so many of these games are horribly optimized, or both[/QUOTE]

honestly at this point I just want to blame consoles for being weak

consoles used to be the only way to go but hardware wise theres too much of a sacrifice

by the time every console game runs at 1080p / stable 60 fps, PC will have already been made to look far better, and 4k will be even creaper.

[Makol]

[QUOTE=J!NX;49215340]honestly at this point I just want to blame consoles for being weak.[/QUOTE]
It's really a combination of both.

[Dark RaveN]

[QUOTE=Svinnik;49215240]How did the devs mess up so badly?[/QUOTE]

Reverse-Arkham Knight for their true PC fans <3

[Valiantttt]

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49215361]Reverse-Arkham Knight for their true PC fans <3[/QUOTE]
Doubt it is on purpose. Even if it was, that would be a fucking idiotic thing and nobody should be celebrating people getting fucked.

[gman003-main]

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49215367]Doubt it is on purpose. Even if it was, that would be a fucking idiotic thing and nobody should be celebrating people getting fucked.[/QUOTE]

I expect they'll be able to patch most of the console issues. Shameful to be sure, games should be playable from the minute they're on sale, but I don't think it's honestly the consoles being too weak. If that were the case, we wouldn't be hearing about the game running well on low-end PCs.

I wonder if it's another case of outsourced porting... if Avalanche developed it as PC and then hired others to deal with the console versions.

[Paul-Simon]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49215243]Apparently the game runs on high on a 660 GTX, which is below the minimum specs.

This is the inverse of Arkham Knight, an apparently great PC port and a bad console port.[/QUOTE]

Funnily enough, the GPU in the PS4 just about matches the GTX 660 (slightly more powerful, even)
I don't know how they messed up the optimization in this game, but I expect they'll be fixing it shortly in updates.

[Kljunas]

[QUOTE=LittleBabyman;49215225]and people dropped on pc version to play on consoles yet under minimum-spec computers could run it on high at a nice 30-60 fps apparently[/QUOTE]

JC2 was probably the best optimised game I've ever played, I'm not surprised.

[Paul-Simon]

[QUOTE=J!NX;49215340]honestly at this point I just want to blame consoles for being weak

consoles used to be the only way to go but hardware wise theres too much of a sacrifice

by the time every console game runs at 1080p / stable 60 fps, PC will have already been made to look far better, and 4k will be even creaper.[/QUOTE]

Well, consoles are cheap and provide pretty good bang for your buck.
If only the games weren't so expensive.

[editline]30th November 2015[/editline]

[QUOTE=Kljunas;49215397]JC2 was probably the best optimised game I've ever played, I'm not surprised.[/QUOTE]

JC2 could run on my laptop with a Nvidia GT 525m with no issues at all, on medium-high settings.

[DOG-GY]

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49215261]Avalanche generally has great PC releases but most gaming PC's have decent CPU's, the main problem is that the consoles have pretty fucking awful CPU, as showcased that the actual explosions etc. won't cause slowdown BUT when the CPU has to work(physics in terms of many objects dividing into more objects and slowdown in city areas) the game slows down.

Just a result of poor choice of hardware for the current-gen consoles. Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to use 2 low-end tablet/laptop CPU's pasted together with 1/2 cores locked off. The GPU isn't even the main bottleneck in this case.
Of course, it is also that the consoles were outdated and not sold with a loss at launch causing them to have poor hardware for lower costs. Last gen it was different because at launch they were sold at a big loss but you got a good device at launch for it.

EDIT: Here is the video of the Xbox One performance
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU9fK5LxoTc[/media][/QUOTE]
In this video he makes claims of JC3 not using a PBR solution. Can someone verify this?

[Lewdis]

This kind of glaring issue makes me wonder how the games release, do the devs really playtest the final release and think "Yeah, its fine. Nobody will notice"

[Valiantttt]

[QUOTE=Louis;49215486]This kind of glaring issue makes me wonder how the games release, do the devs really playtest the final release and think "Yeah, its fine. Nobody will notice"[/QUOTE]
no of course they don't think that.

But they have to print and ship the product, and these videos/issues are before the day 1 patch I believe. So they many times dont have a choice, delaying would mean wasting alot of marketing dollars.

[Christof P]

[QUOTE=Louis;49215486]This kind of glaring issue makes me wonder how the games release, do the devs really playtest the final release and think "Yeah, its fine. Nobody will notice"[/QUOTE]

I imagine it's more the devs freaking out as the release date draws nearer, and having to do what they can so they don't piss off the publisher.

I just wish more games were as polished as MGSV. I know they did have to cut story stuff, mainly because of money and not time, but that game on the performance side is pretty fucking flawless.

[Gloriam]

Seems to have become a trend to blame consoles whenever a game runs like crap, this is a clear case of developers getting lazy or they have no choice to rush the game out, still.. proper time management should help in that case.

[Dark RaveN]

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49215367]Doubt it is on purpose. Even if it was, that would be a fucking idiotic thing and nobody should be celebrating people getting fucked.[/QUOTE]

I don't really care. Obviously it wasn't on purpose, but the more this shit happens, the more PC gaming will get support. I'm up for this.

[Takkenrakker]

tbh just cause 2 on ps3 also had long ass loading times

[Valiantttt]

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49215672]I don't really care. Obviously it wasn't on purpose, but the more this shit happens, the more PC gaming will get support. I'm up for this.[/QUOTE]
Do you really think this will get more support for PC gaming? And then again, cheering because other people get fucked over is fucking idiotic and even more so if you think this will gather more support for PC gaming.

Seriously, if you are up for this then you are also up for more Arkham Knight scenarios and that is pretty fucked up mate.

[frances pit]

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;49215672]I don't really care. Obviously it wasn't on purpose, but the more this shit happens, the more PC gaming will get support. I'm up for this.[/QUOTE]

That's dumb, that's like being glad for people getting food poisoning for eating fish, because then they'll buy hamburgers next time.

Just let people have either and make them both good, don't let your persecution complex get in the way.

[pebkac]

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49215261]Avalanche generally has great PC releases but most gaming PC's have decent CPU's, the main problem is that the consoles have pretty fucking awful CPU, as showcased that the actual explosions etc. won't cause slowdown BUT when the CPU has to work(physics in terms of many objects dividing into more objects and slowdown in city areas) the game slows down.

Just a result of poor choice of hardware for the current-gen consoles. Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to use 2 low-end tablet/laptop CPU's pasted together with 1/2 cores locked off. The GPU isn't even the main bottleneck in this case.
Of course, it is also that the consoles were outdated and not sold with a loss at launch causing them to have poor hardware for lower costs. Last gen it was different because at launch they were sold at a big loss but you got a good device at launch for it.

EDIT: Here is the video of the Xbox One performance
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU9fK5LxoTc[/media][/QUOTE]

Holy shit, those drops in physics-heavy sequences. Reminds me of Red Faction Guerilla, I played it for the first time this year on a way more powerful CPU than you supposedly need to run it (3570k) since it's a pretty old game by now. I still got drops below 30 fps when blowing lots of shit up, turns out the game only really uses a single core. :suicide: