Exactly, the engine wasn't designed for this! I guess it depends on how much faith you put into the Respawn Design team to actually take an engine and try to make it do work it wasn't originally designed for. I think the evidence is there that shows they didn't quite manage the task. Titanfall is not the most demanding game on the xbox one which is why everyone struggles to understand why it's res and fps aren't that great.

"Exactly, the engine wasn't designed for this" - Well yh which is why they TWEAKED it for it. You know that things can change when you tweak them right. A video player not originally designed for support for hardware acceleration but getting it in an update is tweaking it. That's what respawn did. It's not the same engine anymore expect in name.

"I guess it depends on how much faith you put into the Respawn Design team to actually take an engine and try to make it do work it wasn't originally designed for" - You're saying this like they are babies here. Most of the dev team is from infinity ward where they did the same thing with cod why do you think they can't do it again? They are experienced devs.

"Titanfall is not the most demanding game on the xbox one which is why everyone struggles to understand why it's res and fps aren't that great." - It's not the prettiest yes but demanding wise I don't agree now(some time ago I would have agreed when my knowledge was less) it's a MP game with fast movement and unpredictable action compared that to a racing game for example or some other genres where the main thing being rendered is the environment. It also targets 60fps. that's demanding on the hardware. Rough measure on how it is. Trials fusion dev - http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...

It is obvious that they have not fully optimized the old engine, and maybe never will. This new engines are built every new generation, from the ground up. The game plays great by the way.

Link?

You guys keep on saying things without the evidence to back it up.

Here

http://n4g.com/news/1473254...

@Elit3Nick

Do you read past the title?
As that doesn't say that. It says they are using the same baseline physics engine but again tweaked and optimized.

Outdated doesn't mean it's not optimized. It's like saying Windows Vista was > XP because it's newer when it was broken at the time.

PCGH: What physics engine uses titanium case? Have you, for example, played with the idea to implement Nvidia's PhysX to realize a few flashy effects?

"Richard Baker: We use basically still the version of the Havoc physics engine, which was also used in Half-Life 2. We have made ​​a lot of performance and stability improvements, but it is in essence still the same. In the future we will probably look around for other physics engines, because the version used here is somewhat outdated. The titanium case to use upcoming Havok engine is therefore a very early version, which was then heavily revised by Valve for Half-Life 2 and optimized by us. But it is not at the same level of current, more modern versions of Havok."

PCGH: The Xbox One is based on an AMD APU with eight physical threads. Uses the engine case from titanium and this is also the case when we play with a PC with eight cores?

Richard Baker: Basically, we are in the PC process as well as on the Xbox One. On the PC we like on the Xbox One as a main thread and a rendering thread. And then, depending on how many cores are available, additional worker threads, reducing the workload of the main thread. The bulk of the workload of our programmers was to adapt the engine to modern multi-core processors, later to be able to develop the advantages of multithreading on PC and Xbox One.

PCGH: In the case of titanium beta there were very impressed the fast, effective charged fights. We were impressed with how stable into the game for a beta. But also a few more drops, we noticed at very action-packed scenes. Will the retail version run more smoothly?

Richard Baker: With titanium case, it is indeed an online-only game, so we will try to provide a very good support after the release. There are still some points that may improve performance and to which we are still working. We try as to better distribute the particle rendering on multiple processor cores. There is potential power, just as in the physics calculation. Therefore, the frame rates a break even when tons of simulated physics objects fly through the air and countless particles are shown. Therefore, we are also working to improve these two systems are still working. And then of course we have taken care of many things that we noticed during the beta. We have also resolved SLI and Crossfire problems, you can eat there now better performance at higher resolutions. And of course we will generally continue to screw the game after it was delivered. So we will in the future continue to add features and improve performance.

http://www.pcgameshardware....

What he has actually said on dropped framerates -

"A lot of the performance is on the GPU side. There's still room for optimisation and we're still working on it," Baker says. "Ideally it would have been a rock-solid 60 all the time when we shipped but obviously when there's big fights going on, lots of particle effects, lots of physics objects... we're still working to condense the systems, make them more parallel so we can hit 60 all the time, ideally."

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...