The latest generation of consoles and developers alike have come under some flak for not delivering sixty frames per second consistently across all of their games.
Granted every game is better with 60 fps but if i want to specifically play a graphical powerhouse of a game and that is the "vision" of the creators...why not get as much as graphic fidelity as possible using a solid 30fps? Ofcourse you could do 1080p 60 fps but at what cost? dumbing the game down? less aa, graphics, textures ect?
Framerate above all else. If you can't provide the graphical powerhouse with it that means the house has no power.
Nothing is free. You either have a game that looks more bland but at 60FPS, or one with more realistic graphic rendering at 30FPS. Having to render double the FPS is very taxing. Hardware is not infinite. You ALWAYS can do better graphics at 30 FPS than at 60 no matter which system you play, it is simple math. For the single player mode of this game I think it would have been better to have better lighting, AA, AO etc but at 30 FPS for better mood, and the MP could be at 60 but downgraded to meet that target as needed.
What Lamer said. It's not like this is something that's limited to the "weak" consoles. The same is true on PC: drop the framerate, and you have more room for graphical improvement. If devs deliberately want to give you a better looking world, let them. There are some instances where this is actually the case, like with The Order. Of course, you're free to not buy a game because it doesn't meet your personal framerate requirements, but- assuming it's a stable framerate we're talking about here- that's a stupid reason to not buy a game. (Note: this is different from a game being one framerate on one console, and a different one on another. I'd devote a whole bubble to that, but...well.)
It's not that huge of a downgrade to get to 60 fps if you turn off/tune down the right settings. I'll use HBAO as an example which is used in both the PS4/Xone versions of Battlefield 4 but since i can't find a proper online example I'll post one of BF3. http://farm7.static.flickr.... The difference in the screenshot isn't massive but using that effect costs about 10-20 fps alone on the PC version. Another example is TressFX in Tombraider which about a 10-15 fps hit on the fps, it's not worth the performance loss in my opinion if you're struggling to do 60. TLOU Remaster as the most recent example wasn't built specially for the PS4 but still looks great and runs at 60 fps most of the time, same goes for the upcoming Halo MCC.
60 fps is a game-changer for me. I hated the sub-30fps fad from the previous gen. I've been waiting for 60fps console games since Dreamcast. Soul Reaver was my first 60fps game and it was amazing.
Frame rate battle begins!
Except it isn't arbitrary or random.. Not every games needs 60fps.. But you can't act like there isn't a massive difference.
You have got to be ****ing kidding.
*sigh* This topic again? When will games be about games again?
As long as this site exist it wont.
It will always exist, remember Sega has blast processing and does what Nintendon't :P
This isn't something new. Donkey Kong Country was a huge step forward for graphics. Nintendo fans and SEGA fans fought constantly! We just didn't have forums back then. People are stupid. Always have been. Always will be. It's nothing new.
The difference is that developers weren't contributing to the problem like they are today. Sure there were the "Sega does what Nintendon't" ads and everything, but the tech talk has gone way beyond being out of hand these days. It's sad that people will base purchasing decisions on frickin' framerate. Because who cares how good the story is, or the characters are, or the gameplay is, IT'S NOT AT 60FPS SO NO BUY!!
It's more an opinion that we should strive for games to be certain level considering we have been promised so much as a next gen ideal. 60fps isn't something that has been on the table for a few months, for years it has been possible. On consoles it hasn't been feasible because of power constraints, now the next gen consoles are apparently capable. But it is being held off again. By who? People who say 30fps is fine, or by devs? Framerate does make gameplay more enjoyable. So who is holding it back?
What is this thing you mention? Games? Some kind of myth, legend? Those black box things are only for fighting over, right? Is there something else we do with them?
Ho a game runs affects the enjoyment of a game as well. The technological side of gaming has been something generally exclusive to the PC side of gaming, but now it's becoming a bit more mainstream among core console gamers. To most console gamers it doesn't matter as long as the game play and looks good. But for some, and for those like myself who are multi-platform owners (console + PC) then technologically speaking it's of interest and importance to us, because we want games to run the best they can on the given hardware. Gameplay > Performance > Graphics. Gameplay should always come first, but regardless of how good a game is no one wants to play a game where the framerate is all over the place and drops frequently below 30fps into the low 20's or worst 10's. It only becomes a problem when fanboys us it to wage war against one another. 30fps is just fine, because every console gamer accepted it for the last 5 console generations without rolling over and dying, and it won't hurt them this generation either. But if it means pulling some graphical effects for a solid 60fps experience, then 60fps should be the goal. If you want to push the console to its limit graphically then 30fps is probably the safer goal. If you game doesn't require 60fps, then 30fps is still good enough. It matters, but it shouldn't be the end all, like many are trying to make it out to be for their fanboy agendas.
This framerate stuff needs to end! really, it needs to end.
People who want the best gameplay experience possible. Higher framerates is better for gameplay, end of story.
There is a differnce. If the makers want it sub 60fps like the Order then cool, but for all other games it needs to be 60. Once you play anything above 30 you wont want to go back.
"Once you play anything above 30 you wont want to go back! Thats just stupid.
Lots of people, and for games 60 frames a second is always better.
No it is not. It is not because you will have to downgrade other graphics just to get that 60 FPS, it isn't free. It isn't always worth it depending on the game. You will have to cut resolution, textures, lighting, shadows, AA, AO etc just to get a downgraded looking game that runs smoother. Downgraded graphics running 60fps is not "always better".
The graphics for The Last of Us a aren't downgraded for 60 frames a second, they're just improved farther for 30. This shouldn't be surprising to you, the prettier the game the lower the framerate will be. This is true for every platform ever. Why do you think so many games last gen were 30 and CoD was 60? 60 is always better because it's a video game and control is kind of important for that type of thing.
1080 60.shoukd be the standard
If both consoles were more powerful we wouldn't have this everyday. Ok dev's would always want to push more, but look how close Second son & Killzone SF were to being locked 60, soooo close, but they added a 30fps cap to stop the odd stuttering that some found annoying. Now if there was just that little bit more guts, they would all have run at a locked 60, unless of course the dev's pushed even harder.
after playing 120 fps i'd say that I really care about how smooth a game is.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.