Comments (89)
« 1 2 »
Tacklebait  +   1081d ago
why not make 45 fps a standard? I don't understand the need to double the frames from 30. 45 will seem smoother and when a game dips in frames during intensive graphical moments we won't see the choppy 20-25 fps as seen in some games.

As well there won't be as large of a requirement for hardware to be dedicated to rendering those extra frames as 60fps would need.
Muffins1223  +   1081d ago
when you get higher and higher,it takes more fps to see a difference,45 to 30 is not that noticeable unless your a pc gamer who has a native eye to it.
akaakaaka  +   1081d ago | Funny
okay super human.. when i grow up i want to have super powers like you mr pc gamer.. lol
Jobesy  +   1081d ago
Your comment is exactly why people don't like pc gamers such as yourself Muffins.

Ot, I would really like if every game would be 60 fps, but 30 fps LOCKED IN would be acceptable. If we get the kind of framerate crashes like in Fallout this coming gen there will be some hell to pay.

Speaking of Fallout, I hope Fallout 4 is announced at this years E3.
Spoon_  +   1081d ago
But that's the main thing we asked for all the pc elitist laughed and joked us about this why is 1080p 60fps not standard if we are going to have this console for another idk 7 years that will help
jon1234  +   1081d ago
hahaha super human...
Dannycr  +   1081d ago
To the guys mocking Muffins, although it sounded "elitist" it is kinda true.

There are a LOT of gamers who does not know about this whole FPS differences. A good example will be Modern Warfare (60fps) Vs Black Ops (30fps), people just say/think it is "slower" but no, the frames made a BIG difference in gameplay.

Don't trash his opinion just yet because he's right. PC gamers have to keep tweaking settings to get the most stable frame rate in a lot of demanding games so they are used to somehow know when a game drops frames. It is not a superhuman ability, they are just accustomed to this, however, anyone can get accustomed to it.
Hydrolex  +   1080d ago
45 would be good, as long as it is SOLID and doesn't drop... Anything over 40 is actually pretty good
SpinalRemains138   1080d ago | Immature | show
Fluke_Skywalker  +   1080d ago
As a PC and Console gamer, I may be able to straighten this argument a little.
30fps is fine, Far Cry 3 on consoles, is not fine.
The only reason PC gamers notice the difference from 60fps to 30 is hecause we've got 60fps. Its like they say, you don't appreciate things until they're gone. Or in the case of console gamers, they've never had 60fps, well very rarely at least, so they don't really appreciate it.
I personally don't mind 30fps games as long as it doesn't go below that like Far Cry 3 which is absolutely horrible to play on consoles.

So, to summarize, no you don't have to be super human, or a PC gamer to see the difference in 30fps to 60fps but you have to have seen the difference first to be able to see the difference, you get me?

And anyway, any PC gamer still playing at 60fps is a noob, we're at 120fps now, do catch up!
ninjahunter  +   1080d ago
I think the concept Muffins was getting at is that PC gamers will generally tweak their settings to get a certain FPS that they are used to, For example, i Cannot stand playing a game at less than 40 FPS. So the idea is that PC gamers would have more experience between smaller differences in FPS, where console gamers generally only experience 30 fps and 60 fps.

At least thats the idea i have in my head. Not saying that Console gamers have inferior eyes or anything, I just think PC gamers are probably more prone to noticing smaller difference in FPS.
Krew_92  +   1080d ago
As pretentious as it might sound... It's true. It makes sense that people who only game on console be used to the 30 FPS frame rate. PC gamers generally see 40+ FPS, so their brains are used to the higher frame rates.

For example when I got a gaming PC I got used to the 40+ FPS, now most of the console games I see as slow, now this doesn't mean the games suck, your brain just gets used to the 30 FPS again. Until you go back to 40+ FPS, then your brain gets used to that again.

Again though, it would be obvious for this to occur.
#1.1.10 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   1080d ago
You're full of it.

A 15 frame difference is noticeable, be it from 30 to 45 or 45 to 60. I don't care if you do have SuperElitistMan's eyes and are used to higher rates, you're going to be able to tell the difference. I don't care if you have no idea what a "framerate"'re still going to be able to tell that one game runs a lot smoother than the other!

If I had never touched a PC in my life, I would still notice the major difference between the ~45fps of God of War 3 and the typical 30fps of other console games.
#1.1.11 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report
kenoh   1081d ago | Spam
Eyesoftheraven  +   1081d ago
Because most monitors native refresh rate is 60Hz. It just looks "right" and so much smoother. The image also appears clearer/sharper as well since there is more information being shown from 30fps to 60fps. Even a low latency render time between frames at a steady 45fps will have a slight judder to it, because it is out of sync with the monitor's exact refresh rate. Movies' suspension of disbelief benefit from this effect, games do not--especially when it comes to mouse control. I have yet to see what 60fps looks like on a 120Hz monitor though.
#1.3 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
nirwanda  +   1080d ago
Sorry i didnt read your reply first before i typed mine
Kaiou  +   1080d ago
omg you read my mind, i came here to say the EXACT same thing. for example my pc couldn't run the witcher 2 at 60 FPS so i capped my frame rate to 45 , and it's a lot smoother than 30 so much that it's actually hard to tell the difference between it and 60FPS as long as it doesn't dip down.

Stability > FPS number ( a stable 30 is better than a 60 that keeps dipping down to 40s)
#1.4 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
brich233  +   1080d ago
Found this at wikipedia:

"Thomas Edison said that 46 frames per second was the minimum: "anything less will strain the eye."
Grap  +   1080d ago
well he was wrong so does his 110V crap.
#1.5.1 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
nirwanda  +   1080d ago
Its more to do with the way tvs handle the signal, lcd's for instance have generally change depending on what signal its fed thats why modern tvs now have a 24hz mode to match the film frame rate so it updates without having to invent frames and keeps it smooth.
Lcds usally have a 24hz 50hz 60hz and some have 100hz and 120hz.
Plasmas work at much higher refresh rates so its not just as simple as play it at 45 frames as tvs dont like it and it will judder more
DeadlyFire  +   1080d ago
I could see 720 resolution at 60 fps, but 1080 is only going to be 30 fps this generation. I guess we know which resolution CoD is going to be. As 2 Tflops is not nearly enough juice to push 60 fps Unreal Engine 4, CryEngine 3, and so on at 1080. I suspect WiiU is aiming at 720 with 30 frames per second.

Epic games clearly stated that their UE3.9/4 Samaritan demo could run at 1080p with 2.5 Tflops around with around 30fps. Now take into consideration that PS4 is likely pushing 1.9-2.0 Tflops altogether. So take that into consideration. Some optimization here and there likely got us to 1080p at 30 fps. Now the older game engines could work out with 1080 and 60+ fps, but all the new special graphical effects wont exist in most cases.

If PS4 and X720 were somewhere close to 3+ Tflops then yeah 1080 would be possible at nearly 60 fps.
#1.7 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
asbuwango  +   1080d ago
Because most TVs are 60Hz
45fps will be more inconsistence than a rock solid 30fps

at least thats what i understood
Psn800  +   1080d ago
Why have 45fps when you got a console capable of 65fps ? It's the devs not the console .
ATi_Elite  +   1080d ago
The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race
1080p 60 fps is the GOLD STANDARD!

if u say it's not then your a fanboy making up excuses for your platform.

1080p = Full HD

60fps = gets you butter smooth picture and gameplay

The Hardware limited Devs from delivering AAA 1080p 60 fps on consoles last Gen. This Gen seems more capable!
jmc8888  +   1078d ago
That's not how it is. TV's are made to display certain standards.

1080i is 30 frames
1080p is 60 frames

Then you have hdtv's with 120hz
Plasma's with 600hz

Thus the idea is to have the games/media displaying what the HDTV has the ability to show.

The reason why you don't have 240p media is that it would blow up your cable provider and make blu-ray discs obsolete.

It's slowly going to rise, as you have both resolution AND frame rate that takes up bandwidth or storage.

Actually the thing that is more important is not having dips at all. Even if you have dips from 60 to 55 it is noticeable, just like 30 to 25 is. It's just overall it'll remain smoother.

Once they go up to say 240hz a drop to 235 would be harder to notice, but even at 60fps the eye can still notice the change.

The human eye can easily see and recognize something flashed in less than 1/200th of a second. The navy did tests and in that short of a timeframe the people taking the test could tell it was an airplane and even identify what model it was. If you go from being able to identify concretely the model of airplane to just noticing a difference you could be multiples higher. So really the plasma 600hz is probably what we'll eventually reach with 16kTV, etc, etc.

But it's going to take a while for the bandwidth, processing power, and storage to be able to handle all of this.

...and just when you thought it was easy here comes holographic tv and virtual reality.
PopRocks359  +   1081d ago
Devs will always struggle to optimize their games at the highest possible settings at which point the console will struggle to run said games smoothly. Unlike PC tech which can be upgraded, dedicated consoles have their limits and don't usually offer ways around them (RAM upgrade for the N64 and storage upgrades for HD consoles are exceptions to that).

If you have a graphically intensive game that's pushing the console to its limits then it is more difficult to run the game at a higher framerate. It also depends on how sufficient the developer is; Gears of War 3's framerate was fairly solid from what I remember. Sonic Generations' framerate is pretty low and dips when there is a lot of action on the screen. Same with Sonic All-Stars Racing Transformed.

There is a ton of different factors as to why a game may run the way it does. It really just depends on how a game is made and how capable its creators are.
#2 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
shutUpAndTakeMyMoney  +   1081d ago
Don't mention pc this week ps3 and soon to be ps4 only players are hot heads follow my lead k?

ps4 >>>>>>>pc .

console games may or may not be all in 60fps. I don't think they will be. Devs will want to squeeze out all the juice and won't want to waste resources. I imagine all ps4 games at 1080p, 60fps then as ps4 gets old(and some don't think it can get old)devs would have to start lowering the FPS?? This would be a huge lowering of quality over time.

I expect most ps4 games to be 1080p 30-40fps. I don't all console games will be 1080p 60fps until power is not really a problem. So ps5- ps6 it is.
#2.1 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(21) | Report | Reply
PopRocks359  +   1081d ago
A game console can't be better than a PC specs wise. PCs are consistently upgradeable. And either way, they will probably come out with new cards and processors that beat out the PS4's specs within a year. That's just the way the PC parts market work.
#2.1.1 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(3) | Report
CouldHaveYelledUiiW  +   1080d ago

"Don't mention pc this week ps3 and soon to be ps4 only players are hot heads follow my lead k?

ps4 >>>>>>>pc ."

I am certain that was a joke.
And Hilarious. "FUNNY" bubble-up vote.

I am a Nintendo Fanman (still sounds lame) BUT everyone should knows that a Max Specs PC is always going to beat the performance of a console.

A console can only be better because every build is the same. Unlike a PC game that has to cater to a wide array of builds and chips.

A Consoles uniformity may allow for certainty in developers- but even with that there is only so much you can do with any architecture.

That is why consoles have GOT to be about Game-play and Interface; less about power (They can be powerful but after 7 years they will be quickly surpassed).
Towelie-2000  +   1080d ago
Ey man, i might be wrong, but was the PS3 not the first ever console to use blu-ray? Also ps4 has the intention of doubling the screen resolution to 2160 x whatever the hell it is p:) all microsoft and wii can do is reverse engineer the PS console genius (except that new 12gig super slim thing). is the PS4 not named the Orbis? Anyone read about the "Orbis le Vita" concept? that is one point i think playstation can and should exclude..
jon1234  +   1081d ago
funny how every pc gamer always resorts to graphics... graphics doesnt make a game...
Bordel_1900  +   1080d ago
Frames per second isn't a graphics thing. It's about game-play. Once you get used to playing games at 60+ frames per second, 30 fps seems like a lag-fest. Call me elitist or whatever tickles your fancy. 60 fps is so much better than 30 fps, and no it does not make the graphics better, it makes the game-play so much better.

Example? Yeah, Gran Turismo 5 would be a different beast at 30 fps, a lot less responsive and not as smooth as it is at 60 fps (yes, I know it does not manage to maintain a steady 60 fps, but anyway almost no console game does. Console games struggle to even keep a steady 30 fps.)
Bordel_1900  +   1080d ago
Want to add/correct to the above post.

Frames per second isn't mainly a graphics thing, though at 60 fps graphics are much smother and kind pop out of the screen at you, it's about how much better the game-play feels. I would rather have 720p 60 fps than 1080p 30 fps.
papashango  +   1080d ago
Fps has nothing to do with graphics. 30 And 60 fps are two completely different experiences. I game at over 100fps btw. 30 Fps is a massive headache for me now.

if valve shoots for 60fps gaming they have a serious shot to run away with the crown.
#2.2.3 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report
Irishguy95  +   1080d ago
Funny how Ps4 fanboys BS about graphics..then when PC gamers correct them Ps4 fanboys move onto games like the PC gamer was trying to attack them

So defensive over their weak *** console.
jon1234  +   1080d ago
Fanboy? Haha who ever said I was taking sides with Sony, although I do love their products, I don't like pc people who gloat about having better games or higher fps, and although I know fps don't have to do with how graphically intense any game looks, it still doesn't make any game, anymore better than games on a console I can enjoy playing games like bf or gta on a console with out having to worry about updating my drivers... So annoying
SpinalRemains138  +   1080d ago
They only need to rely on graphics until they get their metal legs.
jmc8888  +   1078d ago
What's funny is the following.

When a PS4 guy is having words with people that own PC's....they moan to PC's guys how it isn't about graphics or power, it's about gameplay.

When a PS4 guy is having words with people that own Wii U's....they brag about how powerful the PS4 is and how the graphics are so much better they might as well stop selling the Wii U.

Then there's reality when you realize that the Wii U is only 1/3 as powerful as the PS4 (so not a ton of difference) and that a PS4 is 1/3 the power of a 2013 midrange PC with say an as yet unlaunched GTX 770 or ATI equivalent.

That throughout this huge range of literally 900 percent, the games are capable of scaling up and down that line. Then for this range if someone wants at crazy resolutions above 1080p like 1600p or 5760x1080p then they can build their uber rigs with 3xGTX Titans or 2x GTX 690's or whatever and do it.
DaThreats  +   1081d ago
Has to be, or we be using PS2 and Xbox tech.
Smashbro29  +   1081d ago
60fps NEEDS to be the standard. I can't stand these sluggish games.
Link079  +   1081d ago
NFS isnt sluggish ? its the refresh rate that matters as well you can do 30fps at 60 frames refresh rate makes the game seem smoother DOA 3DS did it.
Funky Town_TX  +   1081d ago
All games should be 60fps
DeadlyFire  +   1080d ago
Well they can be if built at the right resolution. They can keep the good looks and everything and go with 720p at 60fps.

If they went for 3+ Tflops then 1080 at 60 fps would have been possible for every game even without optimization for the platform.
venom06  +   1081d ago
WHO GIVES A FU@#?? 30fps is perfect for FPS games, for exammple... (Gears, Battlefield 3, Halo)... the only FPS that runs @ 60fps is CoD and people act like thats the freakin holy grail of gaming. no one cares.. let CoD be the brain-dead, 60fps, easy-mode garbage that it is, and all the rest of the good FPS game continue to run nicely @ 30fps with GREAT gameplay.. Good gameplay trumps 60fps and stupid arcadey gameplay any day of the week..
Donnieboi  +   1081d ago
Yeah i agree COD sucks, but it's frame rate has nothing to do with it. 60 fps in Battlefield 3 pc really is a smooth experience. It really is hard going back to 30 fps.
Heisenburger  +   1081d ago
You not caring =\= nobody caring.
KwietStorm  +   1080d ago
You have no idea at all what you are talking about
Shacojin  +   1081d ago
1080p should be standard and 60fps should be the target... but, a stable frame rate of 45 or 50 during heavily intense situations should be mandatory for all PS4 games. I don't care if the frame rate Drops to 45 if 64 players in BF4 are C4ing buildings watching them fall apart, helicopters attacking tanks, and just all out war is just breaking out simultaneously.. I just shouldn't notice it dip too bad in the frame rate department when I play.
papashango  +   1080d ago
people seriously underestimate how much of a difference fps makes. If I were a dev I'd shoot for fps first resolution second.

I have a bunch of console gaming coworkers. I've asked them about cod vs battlefield. Being completely oblivious to terms like fps, resolutions, etc. They all told me that cod is faster. at first I thought more enclosed more action faster ok makes sense. But they explained to me how it felt faster. Without realizing it they had stumbled upon wanting 60fps for their shooter needs.
t3gamenews  +   1081d ago
hmm so thats the way next gen is gonna be?
wii u: (graphics far above ps3/360, 60 fps, but not visually above ps4)
ps4: (graphics beat all, 8 core cpu, but only supports under 30 fps?)
xbox: sticking with 360?
ChickeyCantor  +   1081d ago
8 cores or not. The GPU needs to make all the pretty on the screen. If developers are going for intense graphic computation you need to sacrifice some frames to accommodate for all the pretty visuals/shaders.

Keep in mind that it's literally projecting the "3D" space to a 2D buffer calculating every pixel at 60 times a second. And if we have to believe it's going to be 1080p; That's 2073600 pixels at the rate of 1/60 of a second in detail;

The sole reason the GPU exists is because rendering high fidelity visuals is just extremely heavy.
#8.1 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
QuantumWake  +   1081d ago
How exactly is the next Xbox "sticking with 360" when the specs compared to the PS4 are somewhat similar? Durango is rumored to also have an 8-core Jaguar CPU, and also 8GB of RAM. Obviously the differences with the PS4 are GDDR5 vs GDDR3 and the 1.2 TFLOPS for Durango (rumored) vs PS4's 1.84TFLOPS (confirmed).

Unless I'm not understanding your comment correctly, the next Xbox should be a big jump compared to the 360 like the PS4 is to the PS3.
#8.2 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
t3gamenews  +   1080d ago
i was talking in the situation that what if microsoft didn't release another console. i wasn't referring to its specs.

as for the 1st part of my comment?

Related video
QuantumWake  +   1080d ago
Ah, thank you very much for clearing that up! Sorry about that. I didn't understand your comment at first. lol

Chard  +   1081d ago
30fps is fine for certain games as long as it is solid with no dips, and no tearing.
torchic  +   1081d ago
at the very least, 60fps should be the standard for games which follow very explicit corridors/linear paths, platformers, non-chaotic racing games, 2D/3D arcade fighters, etc.
games that don't tax the PS4 too much with the amount of variables all happening on screen at one time.

I don't expect Battlefield 4 to be 60fps with better textures, AA, lighting, 1080p and to top it all off 32 vs. 32 combat. in fact I wouldn't be surprised if they limited conquest to 24 vs. 24 because Battlefield 4 will surely be demanding, but I still expect majority of games to be 60fps.
#10 (Edited 1081d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
delboy  +   1081d ago
Not only will games be 30fps, but as time goes, we will see games struggle to maintain solid 30fps and even be sub 1080p.
Just so that they can hold up with new pc games.
30fps is ok for some slower games, 3rd person adventures, but a competitive fps shooter needs to be 60fps,or racing or fighting game.
I prefer frame rate over graphics, and on pc I always lower the graphics setting if I notice performance dips.
I just can't stand it, it breaks the immersion for me.
I know we won't see it, but I would like to have at least some of the graphics settings options in console games.
papashango  +   1080d ago
We are the same. I don't build high end PCs for the eyecandy. I absolutely must be at a 60fps minimum. I have no problem dropping down the graphics to achieve this
Blacklash93  +   1081d ago
As long as games look better visually with the sacrifice of frames, 30fps will always be prevalent. Sadly this is a fundamental fact in game design that will not change.
clearelite  +   1080d ago
I agree, I would rather see most (at least action titles) PS4 games @ 720/60FPS than 1080/30 FPS.

That is if I had to choose of course. I also agree that certain types of games would be fine at lower FPS.
#12.1 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
cyclindk  +   1081d ago
So far, it seems that this will indeed be commonplace as it has been this generation.

Shadowfall is reported to be 1080p and 30 fps
Shacojin  +   1081d ago
Think I read an article where they said not only were they running an alpha code of Killzone Shawdow Fall on a old devkit, they only used 1.5 GB of RAM. So I can imagine by E3 when they have finalized hardware and implement the 8GB *or 6.5GB depending how much the OS and Share feature will eat up* GG will get it running 1080p at 60fps.. or close enough... prolly 45 or 50
cyclindk  +   1081d ago
I read that too, but I read also, don't have the link, that I believe it was Guerrilla themselves which stated the intended resolution and frame rate.. so that's the only reason I think time will not change anything.

But I do hope its 60 although I can stand 30 just fine too!
Shacojin  +   1081d ago
Hell if the demo looks as good as it does now I'm sure the final game 1080p at 30fps I'd take it.. still hoping for 60 though.. I'm more curious on how the multi player will be though.. wonder if it will be like BF with destructible environments and vehicles.. next Gen Killzone mech battles anyone?!?
cyclindk  +   1080d ago
Sounds good to me :) I really want tons of weapon modifications and cool yet useful character customizations and tech.

Destructibility would be fantastic
danthebios  +   1080d ago
Multiplayer killzone two was fun cant wait for KsF!
koston3647  +   1081d ago
I think in 2016/2017 we will all be at 1080p/60fps
Bordel_1900  +   1080d ago
I would rather have a game running in 720p at 60 frames per second, than a game running in 1080p at 30 frames per second. Target should of course be 1080p at 60 fps.
#15 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
megamanX2  +   1080d ago
because consoles are too weak?

"I think in 2016/2017 we will all be at 1080p/60fps"

yeah lol maybe
#16 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
DOOMZ  +   1080d ago
PS4 won't even do 4K!
WitWolfy  +   1080d ago
Its not 4K YET! Its like the PS3 when it first launched... It couldnt do 3D then, because it wasnt mainstream yet. But give it till about 2018 and it will be... Mark my words.
Kaiou  +   1080d ago
Metal Gear Rising AND Bayonetta run at 60FPS and they look pretty darn good for this gen. But on topic , graphics create hype and hype = $ because in screenshots you won't see 60 you will only see 1 frame. That's why it will never be a standard regardless of the specs.
Hicken  +   1080d ago
I... don't really care.

Graphics are nice, and high FPS can be nice. But what I care about most is whether or not I enjoy the game.

I don't need 60FPS to enjoy a game. Didn't need it when I was playing Galaga and Pole Position, and I don't need it now.

Rather than devs focusing on some stupid numbers, I'd like for them to make sure the games were worth playing.
Bladesfist  +   1080d ago
Stupid numbers? I would prefer it if they cared more about performance than eye candy. If I can't play a game at max settings with at least 45 (feels smooth to me, but everyone is different) then I lower some settings.
MikeMyers  +   1080d ago
Stupid numbers? We have seen many games drop below 30fps this generation and if you didn't notice that then I don't know what to say. Why do you think Polyphony Digital strives for 60fps? Now go play Pole Position and then plug in GT5 and tell me which one you think is smoother and more enjoyable due to the sense of speed and smoothness one does over the other?

I don't think developers should be pushing games mostly for the sake of how pretty it looks. I would rather have games that offer smooth gameplay first. But the problem is they know graphics sell. It's why Insomniac said long ago why they have changed their focus to 30fps instead of 60fps.
#19.2 (Edited 1080d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Erdrick  +   1080d ago
I'm surprised no one's mentioned how awesome playing games at 90 to 120 fps is.
Theyellowflash30  +   1080d ago
Maybe shooters will be at 30 FPS but fighting games like Tekken and Smash Bros are going to be locked at 60. Most of Nintendo's games will be at 720p 60 FPS.
SpartanGR  +   1080d ago
Console vs Pc again? i like em both and i own both. Why the fight? If you have the money go and buy everything out there. Totally different experiences.

I love my quad sli gtx690 pc as much as my ps1,ps2,ps3,xbox,xbox 360, wii, wii u, psvita, 3ds etc.
isarai  +   1080d ago
Even if you don't have the money to get all, why have disdain against the others? I only own a PS3 and PC this gen, but i have no reason to diss 360 or nintendo, they offer great stuff, just not enough in my taste to validate a purchase from me. Just because i can max out Stalker and Crysis doesn't mean it hurts my experince with any console game, i enjoy the games for what they offer, not for the sum of its frames or pixels
isarai  +   1080d ago
Probably not, but i do think it will be something more common than it was this gen
wiseper   1080d ago | Spam
SlyGuy  +   1080d ago
Because 120 fps is going to be the new standard :o

Seriously though, didn't Kutaragi promise this for the PS3? I think the PS4 hardware is more than capable of producing this for some games. Got to say that 100-120 fps is a sight to behold.
isyourhouseonfire  +   1080d ago
If 60fps is not a standard, then COD will continue to dominate every year. I suppose that's not a bad thing but, as a gamer, I want 60fps for everything.
Bebedora  +   1080d ago
The first Ratchet & Clank was in 60 fps. So darn smooth and responsive. The feel of flow and zero drops in frames equals more life like movement, among one of the most noticeable difference I reacted to. 30 vs 60 fps IS a big deal when it comes to game play.

30 fps is acceptable for me though. It's what most PS3 games have anyways, and I play them. Happily so.
marcindpol  +   1080d ago
What the duck do you smoke guys?. I can guarantee you that all next generation games will be 1080p at 60fps. PS4 and new Xbox will be well capable of displaying so.
StreetsofRage  +   1080d ago
Nope. Next gen has to be 60fps. Any developer that doesn't support it are lazy and incompetent.
squarecircle  +   1080d ago
A great example of showcasing 30fps to 60fps is to play Forza Horizon (30fps) and Forza 4 (60fps)

Play Horizon for a few hours, then hop onto Forza 4, the difference is HUGE.

Forza 4 just feels so much smoother and the driving itself is a lot more precise with you feeling like you have more accurate control. Sure Horizon feels great to play on it's own, but in comparison it feels sluggish and slightly more choppy.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login