Console Video & Screen Shots?

EJRose83

Any chance we could get a video or two of the game running on console? I'm really looking forward to playing this on my xbox and I'm curious as to what the graphics will be like compared to PC.

EJRose83

Also, how many average frames per second are you guys striving for, for the xbox one and PS4 versions?

Sallington

EJRose83 wrote: »

Also, how many average frames per second are you guys striving for, for the xbox one and PS4 versions?

Considering I get down to 11-15FPS sometimes in Cyrodil, I'm assuming they are shooting for 5FPS.

Honestly, I don't know how it will run on consoles at all with how bad the CPU optimization is currently.

EJRose83

@Sallington lol You joke, but this is one of the reasons why I'm excited for the console version. Zenimax should be able to optimize the console version around each console's specific hardware and so we shouldn't have the same issues many PC users experience, such as low frame rates in Cyrodiil

freespirit

Check out half way through this Road Ahead there is a still shot taken from a console, not much but something.

http://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/news/post/2014/12/04/the-road-ahead---december-4

EJRose83

Psh, yeah that screen shot is hardly enough to tide me over...

Sallington

EJRose83 wrote: »

@Sallington lol You joke, but this is one of the reasons why I'm excited for the console version. Zenimax should be able to optimize the console version around each console's specific hardware and so we shouldn't have the same issues many PC users experience, such as low frame rates in Cyrodiil

This generation's consoles are basically using under-powered PC hardware, so I wouldn't be expecting any miracles.

That said, I hope that consoles are the reason they do try to get better CPU performance, because it'll affect all of us PC users as well.

EJRose83

I think you'll be surprised what a developer can accomplish with standardized hardware, however slightly under-powered it may be.

Gidorick

When a system doesn't have to run a bloated OS along side of the program they can get away with a lot less raw power.

Hartagon

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

EJRose83

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

My thoughts exactly!

Bloodfang

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Also don't expect ESO to look as good on Consoles as they do on PC (Ultra).

EJRose83

Obviously, the console version won't have better graphics compared to what some of these monster PCs can put out. However, I'll take standardized performance with high graphic settings over ultra high graphics (not that I could afford that kind of PC anyways) and erratic performance any day of the week.

Sallington

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

This is the usual response for how consoles can get 30fps out of a game when the same hardware on a PC wouldn't. But then a 3x as powerful PC runs it way better.

The problem is that very, very powerful PC's are getting FPS drops into the teens and 20s. I hope to god they can optimize it on consoles, because then on PC we'll be able to keep it steady between 40-60 in big battles.

EJRose83

When it comes to PC versus console graphic comparisons, everyone always says PCs have better graphics, which is true, but only if you're willing to drop $1,500 on a decent rig. Smh

Gix

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

Sallington

EJRose83 wrote: »

When it comes to PC versus console graphic comparisons, everyone always says PCs have better graphics, which is true, but only if you're willing to drop $1,500 on a decent rig. Smh

Closer to $800-1000 and that gets you a pretty beast machine. You can build a very solid rig for $700.

$1500 entry fee is the Alienware mindset

Bloodfang

EJRose83 wrote: »

When it comes to PC versus console graphic comparisons, everyone always says PCs have better graphics, which is true, but only if you're willing to drop $1,500 on a decent rig. Smh

Thats actually not true, you can get a way cheaper PC that can still run Superb Graphics compared to Consoles.

Hartagon

Gix wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

I mean... I would get that argument if we were talking about PS3/360... But the PS4 is a pretty beefy machine... And while I think ESO looks good... It isn't exactly the most graphically intensive game by any means.

Sallington

Hartagon wrote: »

Gix wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

I mean... I would get that argument if we were talking about PS3/360... But the PS4 is a pretty beefy machine... And while I think ESO looks good... It isn't exactly the most graphically intensive game by any means.

First time I've heard a 1.6ghz processor be referred to as "beefy".

Hartagon

Sallington wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

Gix wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

I mean... I would get that argument if we were talking about PS3/360... But the PS4 is a pretty beefy machine... And while I think ESO looks good... It isn't exactly the most graphically intensive game by any means.

First time I've heard a 1.6ghz processor be referred to as "beefy".

Guess a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4 is better than my 2.66Ghz i5 2500k, if clock speed is all that matters in a CPU.

EJRose83

Well $350 for an Xbone is still loads cheaper than $700 for a desktop PC. Besides, I'm not really a fan of being hunched over at a desk for hours on end.

EJRose83

Hartagon wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

Gix wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

I mean... I would get that argument if we were talking about PS3/360... But the PS4 is a pretty beefy machine... And while I think ESO looks good... It isn't exactly the most graphically intensive game by any means.

First time I've heard a 1.6ghz processor be referred to as "beefy".

Guess a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4 is better than my 2.66Ghz i5 2500k, if clock speed is all that matters in a CPU.

Haha nice

Sallington

Hartagon wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

Gix wrote: »

Hartagon wrote: »

The game will probably run a lot better on consoles than on PC... It is a lot easier to optimize console games... One set of parts that never changes... They can go in and pinpoint each individual performance issue and correct it...

You can't do that on PC because what is an issue for one user might not be for another and another and so on and so forth for potentially unlimited numbers of system/performance setups.

Part never change, yes, but that doesn't automatically mean that you'll get the same visuals as the PC version at a smooth/smoother framerate.

In fact, optimizing is one challenge in itself. Sure, it's harder to do when you have to consider all the different hardware and OSs... but now they have more constraints because of the hardware of the console.

They're probably remaining quiet right now because of the hurdles of optimizing the game for consoles; most likely because the game (in its current state) doesn't fit.

I mean... I would get that argument if we were talking about PS3/360... But the PS4 is a pretty beefy machine... And while I think ESO looks good... It isn't exactly the most graphically intensive game by any means.

First time I've heard a 1.6ghz processor be referred to as "beefy".

Guess a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4 is better than my 2.66Ghz i5 2500k, if clock speed is all that matters in a CPU.

No, but your 2500k wipes the floor with most if not all AMD processors out right now, especially in single-core performance. Nevermind a 1.6ghz AMD processor. Nevermind that you can easily OC that beast of an i5 for even more of a lead in performance.

Comparing processors with that generation gap doesn't help anything.

EJRose83

Well, considering ESO isn't CPU intensive anyways...

EJRose83

This is where hardware optimization comes in btw

Sallington

EJRose83 wrote: »

Well, considering ESO isn't CPU intensive anyways...

It's extremely CPU intensive, that's the problem.

In a large PvP battle I get the same FPS at 1080p that I do downsampling from 4k.

Boom. CPU bottleneck.

Mjollnir_NL

Really CPU Intensive? I have a old i7 920 cpu. a little over clocked to 3ghz. I never ever have problems in pvp or pve. The only lag i noticed is from the server/network.

Curragraigue

Back in June they were running it at 30 fps on console according to Paul Sage in an online article

EJRose83

Curragraigue wrote: »

Back in June they were running it at 30 fps on console according to Paul Sage in an online article

Oh cool, I hadn't heard of this. Thanks!

SFBryan18

We’ve also added voice chat and full integration with XBL and PSN.

Now I know I will be switching.