Huw Beynon, Head of Global Communications at THQ has recently posted an image to his Foursquare account teasing some new information on Homefront 2. The image he uploaded was a logo from Crytek and with that, a caption.
Xbox Series X's FPS Boost is game-changing when it works and disappointing when it doesn't. While frame rates are often consistent, many titles make concerning sacrifices. This lost compiles 20 FPS Boost games that make major sacrifices, detailing their drawbacks.
As someone with the Series S, it makes more of an impact there than on the X. From what i have seen, if the game already supported One X enhancements, then its best to just let it be on the Series X.
But there’s also 13 games that get FPS Boost on Series X that don’t get it on Series S and another number of game that have higher framerate targets with FPS Boost on Series X than Series S so it’s actually not that cut and dry. It’s pretty disappointing on both ends. The cases where it works as intended or as people may have initially thought it would turn out are too few.
If you have Series S and you use backwards compatibility... it is not comparable to Series X. Series S runs vanilla Xbox One versions because of the lack of RAM to emulate Xbox One X ones, for example. Series X is far greater improvement on BC.
Replies(3)Great to have options I’ve gone back to playing dragon age inquisition and it runs superbly. Good article though detailing differences.
Wow, these downplaying articles are rife this week in the lead up to E3.
Funny how it is only this week these articles are surfacing, even though we knew about Series X not running upgrades from Xbox One X BC games months ago. As per article :-
"If a game doesn't run at a stable performance level, the Microsoft backwards-compatibility team can't adjust game settings or resolution to best reach the target frame rate."
Well yeah, you can not change some other developers game code, only they can enhance their own game via next-gen patches.
There is even one now on how Gamepass for PC is "broken".
Wonder what we will see next? We have had Xbox not making any money on any console ever, gamepass for PC is broken, FPS boost has lackluster upgrades, xbox division is being ran in the red at a consistent loss, gamepass has never been profitable, all in the lead up to Xbox and Bethesda's E3 showing.
Funny times, roll on E3 for me, can't wait.
The issue with games not running One X enhancements as not as simple as you state as again, the first 2 batches had games that worked with One X enhancements. Prey, UFC 4, and Skyrim ran with Xbox One X enhancements. Then in the final batch, we got Shadow of the Tomb Raider. The issue is the inconsistency.
Microsoft taking the “exploit” away that used to exist for still running with One X code in Fallout 4. That workaround got removed which is disappointing.
“We’ve known for months”
Before the last batch of 74 games, we only had 2-3 games that lost the enhancements? So it’s actually only been ONE month that we’ve seen how much of a dramatic cut many games have had to make.
Regardless, this article exists to compile each title’s rendering set-up with and without FPS Boost. I don’t get why people are always so personally insulted when something isn’t praised to high heavens. I LOVED replaying Prey with FPS Boost because I got the best of both worlds. Also loved replaying Shadow of The Tomb Raider. Any of the games on this list however?? Not so impressive.
"So it’s actually only been ONE month"
https://www.ign.com/article...
Since before launch - September 2020
https://twistedvoxel.com/fp...
March 2021
So yeah, it has been known for months, 3 to be precise
All in all, the title description of "lackluster upgrades" is just the series console using the Xbox One S version of the game without the One X enhancements, to achieve the FPS boost.
Says it all when the article needs a disclaimer saying they are essentially "making assumptions"
"While this list compiles information as accurately as possible, some assumptions will be made about dynamic resolution. It is assumed that with the sheer horsepower thrown at base Xbox One code, the dynamic resolution scaler will always hit its peak even with the boosted frame rate. If a bullet-point is book-ended by saying DRS can't be discounted, it's because we didn't have enough information to make a safe claim. "
What you’re highlighting are from the first 2 batches, which my comment already addressed. It was a VERY SMALL number of games that needed sacrifices so it was safe to assume they were outliers. Now with 97 games, 20 of them using Xbox One base code(and a large portion also just being games that never got enhanced to begin with so it’s not actually 77 enhanced One X titles that keep them), it’s a much larger issue than the first 2 batches indiciated. It wasn’t until the final batch in late April or early May, that we saw just how limited the feature is and just how limited Microsoft’s lack of user choice in letting us keep the enhancements is.
Also, that first link is irrelevant because that’s about Series S, a whole separate conversation. This article and conversation is about Series X. Also, at least the article is transparent when it is making an assumption rather than many game journalists that simply regurgitate PR speak as fact, spreading misinformation. When those games revert to base Xbox One code, it’s a fact that they’re going to be using the Xbox One resolution range for that title. The assumption is whether it locks to the top-end or if it drops below the max resolution the DRS was set at for base Xbox One. For many games, we have the data to safely say it’s running at the max resolution. For others, we don’t. It’s not like the article is just pulling resolutions out of its ass.
I simply said the following :-
"We knew about Series X not running Xbox One X versions of BC games months ago" - Fact, regardless of how you want to spin it about batches. 20 games (the ones in the list) run the Xbox One code, like you said, but as stated by the teams themselves, this is to enable FPS boost.
It is only an issue, for those that want the FPS boost, along with the One X enhancements, for the majority, they will take the sacrifice of resolution downgrades, to play at a higher framerate, if that is what they want.
Best explained by the article itself :-
"Unfortunately, FPS Boost has hard limits because no game code is being touched. If a game doesn't run at a stable performance level, the Microsoft backwards-compatibility team can't adjust game settings or resolution to best reach the target frame rate."
So what they are essentially saying, is they can not reprogram games they do not own, to enable the resolution to be stable, along with using FPS boost, so they have to use the base code, to enable the doubling of framerate.
If they started delving and dabbling in other games source code, they will have a mightily fine and hefty lawsuit coming there way.
This will only be addressed for the 20 games in question, via a developer patch. Expect these to be fixed in due course as and when.
But to label things as "lackluster upgrades" when there is only 1 upgrade involved FPS boost, is nothing short of fanboyish.
In short :-
All 20 games on the list, are running at Xbox One resolution with FPS boost enabled, instead of the Xbox One X enhanced versions resolution.
This is a known issue, even when running the same games through the BC program.
A secret Timesplitters 2 port was hidden in Homefront: The Revolution and a team of people have finally worked out how to unlock it.
Still have my PS2 copy, and a multi-tap with my PS2 for 4 player split-screen.
"Unfortunately, there's no info on how these codes might work on the PC version of the game, although it wouldn't be surprising for someone to figure it out in the near future." I wonder if the same codes would work if you plugged a controller to the PC.
We've known for years that Homefront: The Revolution hides an arcade cabinet where you can play a couple of levels from TimeSplitters 2. Now, evidence has come to light that the entirety of TimeSplitters 2's campaign was designed to be fully playable in native 4K.
if crytek is doing it im game!
They need to hurry and get info out on this game, there is going to be a mad rush at the beginning of 2013 to get games out before the announcement of the new consoles. I have a feeling that developers know the announcements are going to happen before E3 2013.
The reason for an announcement before E3 would be to kill some of the steam Nintendo will get from releasing a new console a year before the competition.
Crytek is handling the development so it can't be worse than the first one...can it?
I had just enough enjoyment out of the first game that I am willing to give #2 a chance. While I was disappointed by the single player of Homefront, I saw just enough to see true promise for the game. MP wise I felt Homefront was quite good and fun but lacked in graphical fidelity.
Homefront 2's biggest challenge is going to be finding a spot between BF3 and MW3. How unique can they become? I mean vehicle play was good in HF but its great in BF3... Shooting is really good in both MW3 and BF3 ( one being more twitch than the other ) so .... can it be better? Or good enough that gamers will buy it and support it? That's a tall order if you ask me.
Dear THQ. To hell with Homefront and any other cod clone you're cooking up. Market the hell out of Metro 2033 and Last Light. Shooter fans are dying for unique experiences and Metro could be just the ticket.