1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

PUBG suffers from "horrendous" performance issues on the Xbox One consoles

By midian182 · 11 replies
Dec 14, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. ‘Poor console port’ is a term us PC gamers are familiar with. Games like Batman: Arkham Knight and the original Watch Dogs suffered from a multitude of problems on the PC, but it doesn’t often happen the other way around. With PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds, however, it seems the recent Xbox One and Xbox One X versions are a bit of a disaster.

    The fact it’s not set to come out of Steam Early Access until December 20 could explain some of PUBG’s problems on Microsoft’s consoles. But the breakdown done by Digital Foundry shows it suffering from numerous issues, including “low-resolution textures that seem to be failing to stream in properly.”

    PUBG isn't exactly a smooth experience on the PC, admittedly, even when played on some high-end rigs, but it often appears to struggle terribly on both the Xbox One and the more powerful Xbox One X. While the 4K-capable console does introduce upgrades over the base Xbox One through improved texture details, resolutions, and foliage draw distances, it still suffers from texture pop-in and disappointing performance.

    Both platform struggle to maintain the 30 fps cap—the Xbox One’s average frame rate is 25.6fps, while the Xbox One X manages 27.6.

    “In terms of first impressions, PUBG is borderline horrendous — an assault of low quality artwork, jarring pop-in and disappointing performance,” writes Richard Leadbetter.

    Digital Foundry does add that the game remains fun to play on the consoles, despite the many issues. No doubt the developer will continue to update the game and address some of these problems as time progresses. Still, Xbox One and Xbox One X fans are likely to be disappointed by the findings.

    Permalink to story.

  2. alabama man

    alabama man TS Guru Posts: 536   +328

    ghostf1re and gusticles41 like this.
  3. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,866   +668

    Looks like some quality pre-alpha game play right there, oh wait that got released to the public like that? Looks like the feeble xbox is still just a console. And the developers are a bunch of greedy f'ing pricks for letting this out in this state, this is yet another reason to not support this game, as if there weren't already enough reasons to say pass on this title.
    Phr3d likes this.
  4. Nobina

    Nobina TS Evangelist Posts: 1,585   +1,036

    They brought the tradition of having a badly optimized game on a PC to Xbox too.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2017
    Teko03 likes this.
  5. MaXtor

    MaXtor TS Addict Posts: 170   +73

    No surprise here considering how poorly optimized the game is on PC with top end hardware (I have a 1080ti). Thankfully the game is addictive as f***, most other games I wouldn't ignore the performance issues and mediocre graphics. And I'm complaining about an average of probably 80fps at 3440x1440, I definitely would not play with an average 25fps, my eyes would bleed.
  6. Vulcanproject

    Vulcanproject TS Guru Posts: 447   +492

    At least you can balance your own settings on PC to get decent performance. It was terribly optimized early on pre release but it isn't as bad now, albeit plenty of work left to do. With the console you're at the complete mercy of the developer.

    The fact the game was on PC first and designed for a modern desktop quad core CPU, and they are now trying to get it to run decently on consoles with their tragic old AMD mobile processors this was predictably disastrous. It's usually not so bad the other way around.

    Driving around at 20FPS is a real thing on the Xbox versions lol
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2017
    Godel and MaXtor like this.
  7. TomSEA

    TomSEA TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,934   +1,247

    Wow...that's pretty bad. I wouldn't play that if it were free.
    Puiu likes this.
  8. gusticles41

    gusticles41 TS Guru Posts: 296   +308

    They're blowing a really big opportunity. People would rather wait than have a bombed release like this...That's not even playable to me.
  9. ZackL04

    ZackL04 TS Maniac Posts: 393   +195

    I assume it can be chalked up to AMD Jaguar cores. They suck

    If an old i5 struggles to keep high frames in this game, the console AMD’s have no chance
  10. ghostf1re

    ghostf1re TS Maniac Posts: 285   +154

    I almost bought this yesterday on my X1X, but decided to watch the Digital Foundry video first. I was so glad I didn't just pull the trigger on it. It's disgusting how horrible the performance is on console. As one person above stated, I wouldn't play this game on console if it were free. Money grubbing devs are always bad news for any game. This game doesn't even look like it would be ready for testing 6 months from now on console.
  11. Teko03

    Teko03 TS Evangelist Posts: 520   +276

    The game is just poorly optimized and has been from the jump. I can't even play it on max settings with a GTX 1070 at 1440p. Which is sad considering the graphics sent anything to be about.
  12. kapital98

    kapital98 TS Maniac Posts: 284   +218

    Both are true. The Xbox and PS4 almost certainly picked AMD due to getting a great deal. The idea of them putting a ~$250+ CPU into the system just doesn't make any sense when they could get something from AMD that's almost as good for a fraction of the cost.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...