Remij

To be fair... John counted a dynamic resolution... He's just going with what Eidos told him

PC FH4

It'll come eventually

lol yea I guess.. I thought you knew... but anyway.. the point stands. Just because a game targets 60fps across platforms doesn't mean the input lag will be the same.. even if it is the same developer. As far as Dolby Atmos, I don't think so. I know you can enable it in Windows and it supposedly helps even non Atmos enabled media/software to have better spacial sound. There a few games on PC that do support it though... but there's no mention of it for Shadow of the Tomb Raider on anything other than Xbox afaik. Another thing I want to say @DynamiteCop! is that I ask

Downloading now brehs.. along with Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Is it just a modem or one of those hyrbid modem/routers? My modem is tiny.. about the size of an NES mini.. but thinner.

What the FUCK does that change? Shadow is being developed for PC by Nixxes Carlos.... Did I say that the PC and 360 are special in any way.. or that the XO and PS4 couldn't BE better than they were? No... I said they ALSO targeted 60fps for Rise and STILL HAD input lag... meaning that YOUR POINT about the fact that "all versions were targeting 60fps" meant nothing.... jeez

I'm not sure what you're trying to say... lmao I think it's hilarious that you think you're making some point here.... The fact is that currently... Shadow on X1X and PRO have terrible input lag... to the same extent as they did Rise of the TR... PC never had that problem.. and I don't expect it to be so here either.. both games have performance (60fps modes)... So your point about "all versions targeting 60fps" means nothing.. Carlos... cmon man

That changes none of what I said man. lol Rise was ALWAYS more responsive on PC than the console versions, regardless of visual or performance modes.. The console versions went from bad to ok.. through various patches. This game apparently is just as bad as the original XO version was... on PRO and X1X at this very moment... that's not encouraging. The PC version of Rise was fine while the others were not. Maybe Shadow will be worse... but it stands to reason that again the PC version will be better in that regard compared to the consoles. We'll see I guess

Because the same was true with Rise.. and input lag isn't only tied directly to fps... running higher fps is but one thing that affects input lag. Monitors also have much faster response times and refresh-rates... not to mention disabling vsync and using gsync vastly improves responsiveness.

Which NEVER hits a steady 60fps.. .has juddering and screen tearing galore... and terrible input lag No... we're good.

LMFAO... did you see that AA setting you fucking retard? He changes it part way through... it was at SMAA4X... ROFL... he changed it after to OFF and the fps jumped to 90... then turned the settings to Ultra and the fps was at 50... X1X = somewhere between a 1060 and 1070... With horrible tearing, input lag, and fps drops

You're being just as stupid... anyway I'm not arguing that one resolution is vastly better or worse than the other... what I AM saying is that this EXPLAINS the performance.. especially when you compare to the PC... which they did.

You're right... I wont... because it's LESS likely... What you idiots don't grasp is that NXG's findings fall in line with what I myself suggested before I even KNEW his video existed... If you understand the bottlenecks of the given platforms and gpus.. it explains why we're seeing what we're seeing. All you come to the table with is "bu bu DF said so.. X1X is a super console"

You even have Dynamite right at the top of this page say that "they shouldn't be analyzing pre-release code" lmao... I'm fine with DF... but they make mistakes sometimes. I can admit when they do because I don't have a fucking dog in this fight lmao... The lemmings are the ONLY motherfuckers who get butthurt about stuff like this. Just deal with it idiots.

Indeed.

Fixed your title for you..

No.. Uh...because it can? Judging from the theoretical performance of the part PC ALWAYS has overhead that isn't there on consoles... this is a constant... Given the INFORMATION WE HAVE... It's very indicative... and explains exactly why I think the way I do.. And what the developers do in their patches and what Nvidia does in their drivers are two different things....

A few people seem to think this is a cross gen title. PS4/PS5.. It wouldn't surprise me. Looks awesome though.. hopefully it comes to PC. Someone on resetera said it was announced for PC as well but I can't find any confirmation on that.. I think he was dreaming.

This world is so fucked

I think those fps drops are accurate... taking into account the scaling to 3200x1800 and judging by the PC benchmarks.... that's why I said it explains things

It's right there on the store page... lol

Oh for fuck sakes... Just a bit ago you were fine with comparing it to those PC benchmarks... I even specifically said that they were using an old driver in those benchmarks too... I didn't see you holding off judgement until the final game is released with patch and driver... And I never said there was only 3 set dynamic resolutions... I said it doesn't shift line by line every second... You're speaking out of your ass right now Dynamite... you can get away with this with other posters but not me. I see right through you. It's not 100% fixed... that much is obviou

This seems pretty much confirmed

The fact that he came out with that number isn't odd at all... the dynamic scaler doesn't shift line by line... it has set values that it will drop to or raise to given a certain performance metric... It's not odd.. it's understandable... and lends credibility to him that he's right about it being dynamic. I already explained to you that I understand the ways the statement can be interpreted... but I'm slapping you in the face with very rational reasons why it's likely NOT the way you want it to be... If the normal res is 100% 3584x2016... as both DF and NXG agree... then the fac