What's your problem? It makes no sense to want a worse experience.
verysoft
joined 2 years ago
Why pay for testing when consumers will happily pay the developers to do it? They will even defend your unfinished product for free!
I suppose we could call Cities 'C:S2' and Titanfall 'T2'?
Both are valid, I don't know why people want low framerates when we can have silky smooth ones.
For smooth panning? Why would I want less?
Perhaps that is the case, but it also swings in the opposite direction of games being overpraised when there are glaring issues - see BG3. Bad press usually causes change a lot faster though and I find it refreshing when people actually leave negative reviews with their concerns. Although I agree there are the people who take it too far and just jump on a hate bandwagon, which ruins actual criticisms.
Don't downplay peoples valid concerns, we should strive for better performance in any game. Just because some people can put up with low framerates doesn't mean others should have to. I think 120fps at 1080p should be absolute minimum performance we should accept out of a game given the power of PCs these days.
Twas a quality prank
It's an attempt at a quick cash grab by some publisher, abusing the LOTR IP and it's current resurgence in popularity. Epic Games only too. I wouldn't be surprised to hear later down the line how the devs have been on crunch to get a game out in a ridiculously short amount of time.
Oh fog? I cant see anything? Let me keep driving at full speed. I mean the US driving tests aren't exactly hard compared to others in the world, but you shouldn't need to be told to drive slow in fog, it should be common sense.
60fps is not plenty. You have never used higher have you? Low-end hardware these days is ridiculously powerful compared to what it used to be. Don't let poor optimisation in games condition you to thinking otherwise, they could all be running a lot better.
Anything with lots of camera panning is an objectively nicer experience at 120fps or higher.