PUBG - PlayerUnknown's BattleGrounds [XO, PS4]

[Shifty Geezer]

I think it's a bit disingenuous to say PUBG is non-functional or non-playable. They've sold 25 million copies of the game and it's the most played game on steam. The Xbox version is undoubtedly going to be a success. It's starting a bit rocky, like it did on PC, and they've admitted it's about 6 months behind the PC version, but if you actually look at general user impressions they are good.

That was a generalised statement on EA games in response to Iroboto's generalised comment about EA funding and not directed at PUBG per se (other than as part of a discussion with voices here suggesting it was 'broken'). EA games come in a range of completion and quality including some that are plain broke.

 

[Billy Idol]

I'm 100% sure they're not working on it.

I like that the Xbox serves as a beta test for the future PS4 version

I mean, lazy devs right?

Come on, you are better than that.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Scott's joking. It's a B3D meme.

 

[mpg1]

Maybe storage speed is the main culprit. Supposedly disabling dvr capture makes a noticeable difference in performance:

https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FPUBGXboxOne%252Fcomments%252F7joz2q%252F

https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FPUBGXboxOne%252Fcomments%252F7joz2q%252Fpsa_turn_off_game_dvrgame_capture_for_more_stable%252Fdr8a675

 

[Scott_Arm]

I'd be interested in seeing tests done with the game on external vs internal, and game dvr on/off in both situations. I also believe you can pick which drive gamedvr records to, so I wonder if having it record to one drive and play the game off the other makes a difference. May be a little enlightening about the drive performance in general on xbox.

 

[iroboto]

I like that the Xbox serves as a beta test for the future PS4 version

Most definitely is. Not sure how long it will take to get to 1.0, I know that the current build of Xbox is 6 months behind the PC build, which is nearing 1.0.

Lots of work to get there imo.

 

[Scott_Arm]

So now that I have a 5th place and a 3rd place under my belt, and a bunch of other games, here are my impressions.

It's buggy. I died from falling by jumping over a fence. For the most part, I did not enounter any serious bugs, except that one. The frame rate needs work. In some areas, it drops low enough that it doesn't feel great. Also, even with deadzone on the controller at 0, there seems to be some input lag. Aiming feels clunky. Also, third person aiming is basically broken, as far as I can tell. I was shooting at a target standing beside a tree. The target was not moving. My aimer was on them, and I kept waiting for the reticle to shrink before firing a single shot. I was using an M16 from about fifty feet. I could not hit them. Not sure if that's the horrible netcode, or just something totally broken with the aiming reticle. So if you should, use the first person view, which is a lot better. Still, because of the clunky aiming, the framerate and the terrible netcode, it can be very difficult to hit moving targets. As far as shooting mechanics go, I'd give this game a 5/10.

But, the game is incredibly suspensful, and I still have fun anyway. The sound design is very good. Play with headphones for sure. The sound of the wind through the grass, hearing every footstep and the echo of gunshots in the distance really bring a lot of atmosphere, but also strategic use of sound. You'll hear your enemies before you see them.

I'd say it's a 6 or 7 out of 10, for me. Long ways to go. Hopefully they can actually fix a lot of the issues.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Also, third person aiming is basically broken, as far as I can tell. I was shooting at a target standing beside a tree. The target was not moving. My aimer was on them, and I kept waiting for the reticle to shrink before firing a single shot. I was using an M16 from about fifty feet. I could not hit them.

This is a deliberate design choice. As the game leans more towards realism, just like shooting from the hip in RL, shooting from the hip (3rd person, non-ADS) is meant to be inherently inaccurate. Even more so than what you may be used to in other games. Shooting from the hip really is spray and pray in this game. As such, something like the M249 is decent at close range from the hip due to the sheer volume of bullets.

Even when using ADS, however, there is variations in accuracy based on a weapon's characteristics. Some weapons do less damage per hit, but are more accurate when using ADS. In general, I think the developer has tried to makes the weapons reflect their real life counterparts. However, sometimes things are adjusted in the name of balance.

Also, all weapons suffer from bullet drop and travel time. The caliber of bullet and the weapon that fires the bullet modify that (for example, 5.56 ammo has a flatter trajectory and better accuracy than 7.62x39 ammo).

Regards,
SB

 

[Scott_Arm]

This is a deliberate design choice. As the game leans more towards realism, just like shooting from the hip in RL, shooting from the hip (3rd person, non-ADS) is meant to be inherently inaccurate. Even more so than what you may be used to in other games. Shooting from the hip really is spray and pray in this game. As such, something like the M249 is decent at close range from the hip due to the sheer volume of bullets.

Even when using ADS, however, there is variations in accuracy based on a weapon's characteristics. Some weapons do less damage per hit, but are more accurate when using ADS. In general, I think the developer has tried to makes the weapons reflect their real life counterparts. However, sometimes things are adjusted in the name of balance.

Also, all weapons suffer from bullet drop and travel time. The caliber of bullet and the weapon that fires the bullet modify that (for example, 5.56 ammo has a flatter trajectory and better accuracy than 7.62x39 ammo).

Regards,
SB

But in the 3rd person view the player looks like they're aiming down the weapon sight. It does not look, "from the hip." If that's true, then it should be communicated by the visuals more clearly. I played quite a few rounds believing the ADS view was for weapons with scopes, not typical iron sight.

I'm also going to try playing with sensitivity down. I turned general sensitivity up for looking around, but I'm going to try low sensitivity for aiming. Apparently this game also has aim acceleration, which is always an atrocity. Battlefield 1, Titanfall 2, Gears 4 (I think) all shipped with aim acceleration and are massively better when it's turned off. Game devs really need to stop shipping games with huge controller dead zones and aim acceleration. Most people will never look at the options or understand what those settings are, if they're even optional.

 

[zed]

Don't forget 'Unity for Dummies'.

Well considering how terrible Unity's documentation is I can't fault them for this one ( recently relooked at their documentation and its just as bad as it was 3 years ago )

 

[Silent_Buddha]

But in the 3rd person view the player looks like they're aiming down the weapon sight. It does not look, "from the hip." If that's true, then it should be communicated by the visuals more clearly. I played quite a few rounds believing the ADS view was for weapons with scopes, not typical iron sight.

Ah, gotcha, so you are looking through the sights on the gun then? Yeah, then it's a question of the physics and design of the game.

For example, iron sights and quick sights are sighted at a certain set distance. Beyond that distance you have to adjust your aim upwards. Below that distance you have to adjust your aim downwards.

Optical zoom sights (4x or 8x scope, for example) have an adjustment to "zero" the scope to a set distances so you can adjust somewhat for bullet drop (and rise for closer targets).

And then, of course, as I mentioned each gun and bullet type has slightly different ballistic characteristics. And that's not even taking into account the mods you put on a gun to improve performance in certain areas.

It's a far more complex game than most people know about.

And if the target is moving that's an additional complication with bullet travel time, again depending on gun and bullet type. And then hoping that netcode and/or net conditions aren't screwing you over.

Regards,
SB

 

[Scott_Arm]

Well considering how terrible Unity's documentation is I can't fault them for this one ( recently relooked at their documentation and its just as bad as it was 3 years ago )

It's Unreal Engine, but same thing.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Ah, gotcha, so you are looking through the sights on the gun then? Yeah, then it's a question of the physics and design of the game.

For example, iron sights and quick sights are sighted at a certain set distance. Beyond that distance you have to adjust your aim upwards. Below that distance you have to adjust your aim downwards.

Optical zoom sights (4x or 8x scope, for example) have an adjustment to "zero" the scope to a set distances so you can adjust somewhat for bullet drop (and rise for closer targets).

And then, of course, as I mentioned each gun and bullet type has slightly different ballistic characteristics. And that's not even taking into account the mods you put on a gun to improve performance in certain areas.

It's a far more complex game than most people know about.

And if the target is moving that's an additional complication with bullet travel time, again depending on gun and bullet type. And then hoping that netcode and/or net conditions aren't screwing you over.

Regards,
SB

I wish there was a shooting range where I could practice and get my controls set without having to do it in game.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I'm going to say wait on this one. The responsiveness just isn't good enough. Hard to learn how to play and how the weapons handle when the responsiveness is so poor. Was fun at first, but now that I actually want to improve the performance is a real barrier. It'll be more frustrating than it's worth. Struggling to make sense of aiming and weapon accuracy.

 

[zed]

It's Unreal Engine, but same thing.

OK thanks, I assume Unreal's documentation is better than Unity. I would think this is not the best showcase for the Unreal engine as well, you'ld think they would send over someone to give them some pointers on what they're doing wrong

 

[iroboto]

I'm going to say wait on this one. The responsiveness just isn't good enough. Hard to learn how to play and how the weapons handle when the responsiveness is so poor. Was fun at first, but now that I actually want to improve the performance is a real barrier. It'll be more frustrating than it's worth. Struggling to make sense of aiming and weapon accuracy.

A lot of PC players struggled as well. So you know. 6 months ago on PC I couldn’t hit anything LOL. The recent patches on PC has made killing a lot easier.

 

[Malo]

OK thanks, I assume Unreal's documentation is better than Unity. I would think this is not the best showcase for the Unreal engine as well, you'ld think they would send over someone to give them some pointers on what they're doing wrong

Well they worked with Epic to make a bunch of changes to make the large map and amount of players work much better, then Epic turned around and apparently applied it to Fortnite Battleground. Now we have lawsuits over it.

 

[Scott_Arm]

OK thanks, I assume Unreal's documentation is better than Unity. I would think this is not the best showcase for the Unreal engine as well, you'ld think they would send over someone to give them some pointers on what they're doing wrong

UE is a very nice engine with great flexibility. It can do a ton of things, but that comes at the cost of not being as highly optimized. It supports every platform you can think of. Open world games is not its strength. A very technical dev could rewrite major parts of the engine to suit their needs. Out of the box, or without major modification, you're not going to see the kind of performance you'd get from a AAA dev.

 

[iroboto]

Well they worked with Epic to make a bunch of changes to make the large map and amount of players work much better, then Epic turned around and apparently applied it to Fortnite Battleground. Now we have lawsuits over it.

UNsure if there are lawsuits. But blue hole is certainly pissed. LOL. They may not have covered their bases when they had Epic make those modification changes. So if those changes were allowed to go back to the engine... welp.

 

[zed]

Well they worked with Epic to make a bunch of changes to make the large map and amount of players work much better, then Epic turned around and apparently applied it to Fortnite Battleground

Well so basically you're saying the Unreal engine can in fact create a battle royale game that runs with good performance as its been done with Fortnite Battleground (runs at 60fps and looks better to boot), so why is PUBG so broken, unless you're claiming epic has purposely cripple PUBG somehow? I think its more just the team and not the engine per se, just look at all the aspects of it, not just the performance. eg the animations of the ppl are just laughable, the textures etc