It amazes me that PC gamers spend a lot of money on their rigs just to play ugly games like PUBG

What's even more funny is when those type of games run like shit on their 1080's and they bitch and whine how their cards can't run the game at 120fps

He is most likely trying to limit the amount of options we can list so it can look like he is right

And those games can be played at 144FPS, which is much better than any pretty-turd that console publishers can cook up.

It amazes me how much importance peasants place on graphics, we get it.. your shallow... you want to justify your walled-garden branded HTPC rip off....

Amazes me how millions of people buy things like Destiny.. which you can literally walk through.... and has the character and complexity of paris hilton.

Can you quote some examples of PC gamers bitching about games not hitting 120fps please.

PUBG is the next big thing on consoles? That has happened? How can it have happened if it isn't out yet lol.

I play at 60 fps or more.

Game looks like ass. What did you expect?

You can find numerous posts on the steam forums whining about fps issues, it's not hard. Theres forums outside of this pos site hope you realize that. Hell looking at the PUBG forums on steam there's a a few new threads every hour, most of them are crying about graphical errors (which inc from fps issues to black screen ect ect the list goes on). If you have steam you can look at almost any game on there at there's at least one or two threads crying about fps issues.

The game looks like ass, what do you expect?

Sounds like some people don't realize that some bottlenecks are network bound and not GPU/CPU bound. Which is what often happens in large population persistent world online games. And these things tie more into the CPU load than the GPU.

Early access game

I spent a of money on my PC making my PC look beautiful never mind the game...... I've built some stunning looking PC's.......... (IMO of course :P)

You made the statement that PC gamers bitch about not getting 120fps with a 1080, I've never seen this and I'm asking you to show examples. Telling me to go look for them is not how a discussion works.

I guess it's hard for you to look at other forums then, stop being a ******* lazy ass or actually look at the thousand of discussions on the steam forums.

@Ballroompirate: Not my job, you made the statement, back it up or it's false.

I don't give a **** if you think it's false, you're too damn lazy to look at ANY steam game discussions. Here I'll give a nudge, look at assassins creed black flag discussions on steam. All you have to do is type assassins creed black flag in steam and there you go, there's a few threads in the first few pages about people crying about performance/fps issues who have 980's and 1080's.

If you still don't want to do it, then you proved you're a lazy peon.

No! You are not allowed choices. You run the game at the settings and framerate that are given to you! This is why its better! :P

I read "It amazes me that PC gamers spend a lot of money on their rigs just to watch PAWG" LOL

I spend all that money to communicate with the subterranean lizard folk. I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

@Ballroompirate: Why on earth would I waste my time looking through forums to back up your statement? You made it, you prove it. Just link of those forum posts that have PC gamers complaining about not getting 120fps with a GTX 1080, if there are so many it shouldn't be difficult to back up your declaration.

Very cinematic.

Glad you proved my point that you're lazy as ****. All you had to do was look up Assassins Creed Black Flag on steam and look at the forums/discussions, "but you didn't link anything derp", LOL I literally told you where to see the proof is and you're still LAZY AS ****. So you see pleb, telling you where to find something isn't the same as "welp I saw this somewhere but I don't remember where it was", so you see if I said something along the lines of that you would have had a point but guess what chump, I told you where you could find it and all you had to do was boot up steam and type in assassins creed black flag----->hit discussions------>bam there was two threads within the first two pages about performance issues/fps issues with users having not only 980's but 1080's as well.

Hell if you played ANY Ubisoft game within the last decade you'd know even having high end cards have fps/performance issues which we all know it's mostly Ubisofts lack of actually optimizing their games. Also as someone who's been here 6 years you should know people flip their shit here when games don't hit 60 fps XD.

But nah I'm somehow making all this shit up lol, damn I wish I could be lazy and oblivious as you. The sad thing is there could be a thread here that had people complaining about not getting high fps with high end cards, I could tell you "look at the thread in PC Discussion" and I'd bet you'd still be too lazy to actually click 3 buttons to get where you need to go lol, man I'm starting to feel sorry for you.

@Ballroompirate: Lots of words and still nothing to back up your statement. So much wasted energy going into your wriggling, accusing, insulting and deflecting, surely it would be easier to link a forum post with a PC gamer bitching and whining about not getting 120 fps with a GTX 1080? There are apparently lots of them after all.

Ubisoft is a giant dev with an insane amount of resources. Are they exempt from having optimization in their games? Black Flag is a decent looking game, but it doesn't come anywhere near Battlefield 1 for instance, and I get 90+ fps in BF1 at 2560 x 1080 on ultra. Black Flag, however, drops to 45 fps every so often when I move to another area. It hits 60 most of the time, but it does have random drops. It's just a horribly optimized game.

Holy shit, ballroompirate really screwed the pooch in this argument lol.

@Ballroompirate: First of all...No. Second of all I'm sorry PC gamers haven't settled for 27 FPS. That's quite literally nauseating and I'd never spend $60 on a game to play at sub 60FPS much less by a $400 console on top of that.

Theres a reason consoles dont get early access. Developers are trying to build a fucking game instead of pay several grand just to push out an update. But apparently Ark are top tier devs now so, what do i know :D

Exclusives are a small portion of what most people play regardless of platform... Well excluding Nintendo since they dont have many third party games.

Playing games like the Wither 3 at 4K 60FPS... Its why I have a GTX 1080 Ti.

This thread still exists on the front page....

Lol to bad Gar is lazy as *****, it's not my problem.

The only thing wasted is your lazy ass not doing 1 simple thing lol, I literally told you where to search and you're still lazy, but you know what here's a thread cause you're lazy as ****

http://steamcommunity.com/app/242050/discussions/0/350543841947950992/

Damn it feels owning lazy asses like you, there's a few people with 980's and 1080s who couldn't get a simple 60 fps. Of course everyone has different rigs so in no way should you blame everything on a card (there's a lot to factor in like ram ect ect).

PAWG...

It was never on Gar to prove anything...

False it is then.

If only there was a way to actually see what I was saying...oh wait, I literally pointed him in the right direction even pointed to where to look. Do you know how many games are on steam? do you, I'm not gonna go into every games discussion area and hyper link to their threads, hell even if I used the games in my library thats 355 games to in the discussions, I did Gar a favor and told him one games discussions he could look at (hell if you've been on steam forums at all you'd see at least one thread about someone qqing about their 980/1080 not running a game on high fps).

If I told you IGN had a article of Kotor 3 being released and you were to lazy to type in ign.com, it's not my fault you or anyone else was too lazy to do a simple search, do you have you're parents wipe your ass? hopefully no. People need to stop being lazy peons on this site. Gar would have had a point if I didn't back ANYTHING up with my claim, and hell if anyone has been on this site for as long as he has they would see how many qq threads about fps go through here over the years.

REKT.

@davillain-: You might want to look up the meaning of False lol

First you said it was 120 fps. Now it's 60 fps. So, if a game can't achieve 60 fps, is that not a crappy port and people have the right to complain?

Astounding how dense you are.

You making the original claim means the Burden Of Proof is on you so it is up to YOU to present the evidence to them, not for you to point them in the general direction and to tell them to go find it,

This is debating 101, and you are not getting it so your at fault here, you expecting others to put any effort into proving you right is ridiculous when you wont even put in the effort to do it for yourself.

If it is so prevalent as you claim it should take no more than a few mins for you to post numerous sources to back up your own argument from the "thousands" of discussions........so?

This is why i come here to SW to witness Derp of the highest order, it's entertainment.

@DragonfireXZ95: 120 fps was a bit of over exaggeration, still people complain if a game doesn't meet their "standard 60 fps" quota which has been qqed to death (personally I don't care as long as it doesn't dip below 30 fps).

Saying no one has ever qqed about fps expectations is pretty stupid, it would be like saying Sony has never made an awful game.

Well, that's an entirely different story. I have a 1080 and Black Flag. It runs like garbage, and it's horribly optimized. It constantly dips down to 45 fps from 60, and it's not unplayable, but it is incredibly annoying.

@naz99: Oh it's you XD was wondering when you would show cause last time you got pretty pissy

I agree, when games do that (even BLF) I would never blame it on the card (or at least almost never) cause most game aren't optimized day 1 that require a few patches or are just badly optimized like most Ubi games. Hell some issues might not even be a gpu issue and could be a cpu issue depending on whats wrong with the game. The whole entire point of my first post was to mock all the people who have 980's and 1080's who expect those cards to run games at a flawless 60+ fps w/o any issues.

You might not see a lot of people complain about it here but if you go to the steam discussions on certain games it's like a damn plague over there.

What does 120fps have to do with a significant majority of multiplats being better on PC and this thread being a farce?

I mean, it's burden of proof.

yea... like 95% of them.

Peasants gotta grasp at something.

PC / Switch Master Race Alliance.

You do realise the only person you're owning is yourself, don't you?

@DragonfireXZ95: 120 fps was a bit of over exaggeration, still people complain if a game doesn't meet their "standard 60 fps" quota which has been qqed to death (personally I don't care as long as it doesn't dip below 30 fps).

Saying no one has ever qqed about fps expectations is pretty stupid, it would be like saying Sony has never made an awful game.

So your original comment was false, what was so hard about admitting that.

You'll notice that at no point have I said no one has ever complained about frame rates