Top
Insert Thought Provoking Quote Here

DragonKnight

Contributor
CRank: 9Score: 0

Get Over 60FPS Because It Doesn't Matter

*NOTE* Please read the Edit at the bottom.

There are too many fanboys of all the camps whining about games that aren't 60FPS. The automatic conclusion is that the consoles can't handle it and thus the new generation isn't much to talk about just because of that lack of 60FPS for some launch games. It's my opinion that you're wrong to complain about the lack of 60FPS in games and I'll explain why.

First of all, these are launch games. Do you think these launch games just started development? You'd be wrong if you do. These games have been in development for at least a year before developers even knew what to expect from the new gen consoles, possibly even more.

Developers create their own ridiculously over powered gaming PCs to develop the games on before they have even a hint of the final specs of the new consoles. This means that when they DO know the specs, they have to downgrade and compromise from the original development version they have on their OP PCs. Things will be cut, things will be scaled down, and sacrifices will be made to keep an overall vision of the final game product a quality vision.

This is just the way the gaming industry works due to the need of surprises and competition and has nothing to do with the tech in the consoles or the skill of the developers.

Consoles will never equal the technical power of gaming PCs because there has to be a sacrifice made for value otherwise consoles wouldn't be able to sell in the mass numbers needed and that's why the original development version made on suped up PCs will always be more technically impressive than what can be done on consoles.

Secondly, game engines are probably the bigger culprit than the consoles. Consoles have fixed, unchanging hardware. This new generation is the closest consoles have ever been to being PCs and the tech that is in each of them should be more than enough to handle games at 1080p and 60FPS. Any PC elitist will be more than happy to drone on endlessly about how their 2006 midrange PC can do it, and with inferior tech, so how can any of you honestly believe that the consoles are the reason for a lack of 60FPS?

Did it never occur to you that the engine might be the cause? That the software is poorly optimized or conflicts with something? That the engine was developed on those suped up PCs and is having to make concessions? Of course not. It's obviously the fault of the fixed, unchanging hardware of the consoles right?

Thirdly, the human eye sees at variable frame rates depending on certain conditions such as the condition of your eyes, the lighting of the room, the angle of view, etc... This means that we can possibly see framerates of up to 200FPS or as low as 24FPS depending on those conditions. This also means that most people will never notice a difference between 30 and 60 FPS unless they've been experiencing 60FPS on a consistent and normal basis.

I hate to break it to you but most of our day to day lives don't involve moments where anything we see is moving at 60FPS, and the majority of console gamers are not exposed to it with the same frequency as PC gamers who make their games run at 60FPS through sheer processing power. For those of you who are used to 60FPS because you game on PCs a lot, stick to PCs and stop complaining about console games when you're so eager to laud the power of your rig over everyone else like some kind of contest between neighbours to see who has better stuff.

For those who aren't used to 60FPS, you're not going to notice much of a difference if you aren't already exposed to 60FPS all the time so stop jumping on hate bandwagons just to be part of something or to troll.

Finally, a reason everyone chooses to ignore regarding the absence of 60FPS is necessity. 60FPS is mostly useful for reaction time in games that require quick thinking and quick action. For games where you're taking your time, you don't need 60FPS. 60FPS in games such as Watch Dogs would be a waste of resources because the fastest action would come from driving instances and those aren't what the game is chiefly about.

Developers who target 30FPS instead of 60 may be doing so so that another area of their game is better. By using the resources that would have went into the FPS for something else, they can make any number of areas better to contribute to the overall quality of the final product. Would you rather have a 60FPS game with pop-in and screen tearing, or a 30FPS game that looks beautiful and has no such afflictions? Granted, that's a poor example but it is a legitimate one.

This is the problem with introducing more and more PC aspects into console gaming. Ridiculous discussions like how many polygons are in a character, or how many frames are shown in a second in a game are taking precedence over things like gameplay, world, story, character development. I'm so sure that 60FPS will tell you all you need to know about the antagonist's motivations. I'm positive that the amount of triangles in a character design will help you master the deep gameplay. These discussions have become beyond ridiculous at this point, and the amount of FUD or Damage Control or other nonsense has reached beyond critical mass.

Like the title says, get over 60FPS. It really doesn't matter and none of you are even acknowledging legitimate reasons for its exclusion from games and simply jumping on the "the console is underpowered" bandwagon of hate. It's like you're not in gaming for the games, you're in it for the technology.

Quick, someone create News4TechGeeks so at least the conversations will have some relevance.

**EDIT** I realize that I came off far too harshly in saying people were idiots, to that end I issue a formal apology for that and have edited the blog to be less of an attack on opinions. However I maintain the stance that 60FPS is not necessary for games to be good, or enjoyable, and that too many are losing their sh*t over framerates instead of asking questions like "is the game good." There are also too many not bothering to look into why a game may or may not have 60FPS and what was sacrificed or improved with the inclusion or exclusion, respectively, of said framerate. I also maintain that until you are shown the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS, you won't know the difference no matter how many people (who've already seen the difference after being shown) want to call me an idiot for stating an obvious fact which can be ascertained by researching the capabilities of the human eye.

The story is too old to be commented.
zerocrossing1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

The only time a game running lower than 60FPS ever bothered me was with Ninja Theory's DmC: Devil May cry, it felt very choppy and slow at times compared to the original titles and there was a definite delayed reaction to my button presses. Although, I have been told that this could have been due to poor optimisation rather than a lower FPS anyway I just figured I'd put it out there.

But yeah, 60FPS isn't a requirement because there are very few games you'll really notice a difference with or without it. And as you've pretty much already stated already, it's early days people! give the developers a chance to work on creating games specifically tailored for next gen consoles.

DragonKnight1035d ago

Oh I admit there are games where 60FPS is an asset to gameplay, and genres where it's a necessity but not the majority of gaming. And like you said, poor optimisation is a factor in its exclusion from games but people don't seem to get that.

dark-hollow1035d ago

No way. I can understand why consoles cant run some games on 60fps, but to claim that games won't benefit from it and makes "no noticeable difference" is just bullcrap.

60fps makes HELL of a difference, and all games benefit from smooth, fluid framerates. Just go play any pc multiplats then go play the 30fps console version. The difference in smoothness and fluidity is HUGE.

RobbyGrob1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

The reason why people want 60 FPS next-gen is because the previous console generation was close enough to give us 60 FPS in some games and people therefor expect it when paying 400-500 bucks for yet another console generation that this time around certainly is powerful enough to deliver on that.

It's also definitely not stupid to desire that high a frame-rate. The FPS has an enormous and direct influence upon the very enjoyment itself of all games. In fact, it's been scientifically proven that people feel more deeply involved when what they're viewing is being displayed in a frame-rate that is as close to reality as possible. Similarly, a low frame-rate makes people feel less connected, thus less entertained.

I'd take 60 FPS over extreme amounts of polygons and unlimited viewing distance in every single game. A strong conscious connection and deep involvement is way more important. And a high FPS does that much better than picture-perfect graphics quality.

Bundi1033d ago

Good grief. PS4 can't do 60fps on all games and suddenly it doesn't matter.
A few months ago everybody was confident and demanding all next gen games to be 1080p/60fps and now that next gen consoles can't promise that with wall games the fanboys are coming up with excuses.

You sir are predictable and so transparent.

yaz2881035d ago

"But yeah, 60FPS isn't a requirement because there are very few games you'll really notice a difference with or without it"

stop!.. ok I understand that its not important for some people.. but just don't...

I've experienced a lot of 60fps games(pc) and there 30 version on console. you'll really notice a difference in every game.

60fps make the game.. all games really sexy!! forget the input and delayed reaction and what shit, just watch it or try to experience it yourself.

far cry 3, splinter cell blacklist , assassin creed, castlevania lord of shadows .. in every game I swear playing the console version (after playing the pc) can be really hard sometime .. it really is something else when I play them 1080 and 60fps.

zerocrossing1035d ago

60FPS may improve some games, but it's certainly not a "requirement".

HeavenlySnipes1033d ago

Did you guys read the whole thing?

He said only people that regularly game on the PC would notice the difference. If you're a console gamer playing games at 30FPS for 7 years, you'll barely notice the upgrade.

In most cases, it isn't even necessary. Like people crying that Ryse isn't 60FPS when its not a fast paced action game to begin with

Its the reason KZ SF's SP is 30FPS (to focus more on the effects and other areas of graphics) and the MP is 60FPS (where the player would benefit from it. People are making it seem as if the game won't look/play well if its not at 60FPS

(P.S. Crysis 3 on PC is the best looking game I've played, but my setup could only handle the game at around 30FPS on medium settings. That didn't change the fact that it looked phenomenal)

CrossingEden1035d ago

Frames per second didn't affect anything in DmC, if it did, videos like this wouldn't exist on consoles.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

JackVagina1034d ago

No point in trying to fight with DMC haters, their minds are already made up

rainslacker1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

Steady frame rate is generally better than high frame rate. If the frame rate can't be locked though, it's best to provide high frame rate, so the slow downs aren't noticeable.

I'd wager, if not for slow down, most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 30 and 60 frames per second.

MEsoJD1033d ago (Edited 1033d ago )

I can't think of a game that wasn't better at 60fps than 30fps. For example, when the 60fps unlock came out for Dark Souls Prepare to die Edition it was like experiencing the game for the first time again.... I couldn't go back. I'd rather have developers of next gen games strive for 720p/60fps than 1080p/30fps. Though I do game on pc as well so maybe I'm a little spoiled? To end, 60fps in my opinion should be the standard for next gen. Not only does it make the game feel more satisfying it ultimately enhances gameplay.

Here's a eurogamer article showing Uncharted 3 running at 30fps and 60fps. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

MEsoJD1033d ago

Here's also a download showcasing Dark Souls running at 60fps.
http://www.mediafire.com/do...

Yes, it's so beautiful and smooth. :3

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1033d ago
XboxFun1035d ago OffTopicShowReplies(2)
wtopez1035d ago

It doesn't matter, huh? Oh boy...

MidnytRain1035d ago

Anyone who says they can't see the difference between 30 and 60 frames is not really seeing both, or lying. There's a CLEAR difference between the two. I don't understand how anyone COULDN'T tell the difference.

Jovanian 1035d ago

framerate fundamentally alters gameplay. Its why games like COD are so universally praised and played, because of its fluidity of controls due to 60 FPS. I'm not even arguing that COD is good, but its edge over the competition is its got a solid framerate at 60 FPS. Response time is greatly increased, actions feel direct and impacting, and overall the pace of the game is increased. You cannot play a fast paced game with a low framerate and hope to survive the competition who are playing with a high framerate and of equal skill to you.

Framerate also immerses the player if the world is more fluid. A clunky, 30 fps render of a game world may look nice in still screenshots but compared to 60 fps render its a night and day difference, the 60 fps render feels far more alive

DragonKnight1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

Did I not mention that 60FPS only matters in games where quick response times are necessary? I believe so.

"60FPS is mostly useful for reaction time in games that require quick thinking and quick action."

Yep, right there.

You also understand that 60FPS isn't necessary for fluidity right? Ever watched a movie? They aren't in 60FPS you know.

**EDIT** @below: I can agree with you about 24fps movie vs 24fps game, but FPS for games is really just about the style of presentation you want. 30FPS isn't an unplayable game, yet people act like it is. It's hilarious too because most console gamers have been playing 30FPS games their whole life and now suddenly they can't? It's ridiculous.

Jovanian 1035d ago

Well movies are an entirely different bag of apples compared to something as interactive as gaming. You can feel when a game is low framerate because of the feedback you get when you move your character and the screen choppily adjusts. You don't get this effect in movies.

How about this

compare a 24 fps movie to a 24 fps game and you will notice that the game is remarkably choppy while the movie looks smooth. Care to explain this discrepancy?

Jovanian 1035d ago

Well I think the primary reason they are expecting such good performance and framerate and graphics is because all this talk about how next-gen is going to be such amazing graphics, when in reality the hardware is already considerably dated. They don't realize what they are asking, 60 fps and 1080p at the graphical fidelity of next gen games just isn't realistic on 400 dollar hardware

If that were realistic, I would swoop in and buy the PS4 in a heart beat because the price to performance ratio would be amazing

Maybe I will get PS4 in the future, but only after a considerable price drop or a christmas bundle, only after there is no news of crippling hardware failure issues like RROD or BLOD

DragonKnight1035d ago

Yeah, hype is the biggest enemy to any console launch, especially on sites like this one. Too many people ignore what goes into game development and just expect the absurd right out of the gate.

It's been said several times already that the leap between the current gen and the next gen will not be a huge one, but people don't listen and instead choose to bicker about framerates and resolution, completely ignoring if the game is good or not.

Ducky1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

"For those who aren't used to 60FPS, shut up."

While we're at it. For those who aren't used to 1080p gaming, shut up.

How dare you expect these new consoles to do anything better than the old ones?
Besides, you won't even be able to tell the difference, and its not even the hardwares fault, those developers just don't know how to code properly.

You should demand better story and character development instead. Don't you know that is what new hardware is useful for?

Man, this is some hilarious stuff right here.

DragonKnight1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

Your sarcasm is what's hilarious. You completely ignore the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that the consoles aren't doing anything better and jump right into a "60FPS IS IMPORTANT DAMMIT" style of comment. As if to say that a game that isn't at 60FPS is unplayable.

Seriously, if you're going to argue about how many frames are shown per second then you're not enjoying the game, you're enjoying the tech. And this idea that expecting 60FPS is expecting a higher standard is ridiculous because no one cares what your standards are just like no one cares what mine are.

The best thing you can say about 60FPS' necessity is that it's subjective, not necessary.

@Below: "... well, neither is resolution, or story, or character development."

This response is laughable. Resoultion we can have a debate about when it matters and when it doesn't. But story and character development (in games that have them) is absolutely necessary. You try playing a game like The Last of Us with a terrible story, or a game like Dark Souls with terrible gameplay and then tell me you can enjoy it. Granted, it won't matter for games like Tetris, but isolated examples aren't the norm.

"To say it doesn't matter? That's where you've gone off the deep end."

No, it's the truth. It doesn't matter. If you've been able to play, and enjoy, 30FPS games then that's proof enough that it doesn't matter. I've already made allocations for games that require it for reaction times such as CoD, but beyond those games it's completely unnecessary to be able to enjoy the game and be able to actually play it. Can you prove that you wouldn't be able to factually enjoy and play Watch Dogs at 30FPS?

"Also, enjoying 60fps is not enjoying tech. That comment just shows how little familiarity you have with 60fps games. No wonder you think it doesn't matter."

Funny how you skewed what I said to suit your lame argument. Allow me to reiterate. If you're going to complain that every game you are excited for doesn't have a 60FPS framerate, then you're not enjoying the game for the game, you're enjoying the tech of the game. If the framerate, beyond it being absurdly low to the point of being unplayable, is a determining factor in your enjoyment of a game then your priorities suck and you are absolutely enjoying the tech over the game. There are genres were 60FPS is an asset to playing well, but to b*tch about its exclusion from games where that's not the case is a clear indication that the game is not your main interest.

Ducky1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

"The best thing you can say about 60FPS' necessity is that it's subjective, not necessary."

... well, neither is resolution, or story, or character development.

You can say it isn't necessary, I agree.
To say it doesn't matter? That's where you've gone off the deep end.

Also, enjoying 60fps is not enjoying tech. That comment just shows how little familiarity you have with 60fps games. No wonder you think it doesn't matter.

Ducky1035d ago

As for your edit:

I enjoyed TLOU for it's gameplay, as well as the story. Would've enjoyed it even if the story was poor.

DSouls just proves my point. Did you play it for the story/character development?

Also, you might want to check who is skewing who's argument. I never said gameplay didn't matter, and I also never said that a game without 60fps is unplayable.

Do you have a hard time understanding me when I agreed that 60fps is not necessary?
That means a game without it is still fine.

BUT, to say it doesn't matter would mean that a game would not benefit from it. That is where you are wrong. Developers like Carmack, PD, GG pursue 60fps because it does matter.

DragonKnight1035d ago

"I enjoyed TLOU for it's gameplay, as well as the story. Would've enjoyed it even if the story was poor."

Sure you would've. Nevermind that the story and character relations were central to the game. No let's just remove those elements and you'd have definitely enjoyed it. Did the framerate cause enjoyment for you?

"DSouls just proves my point. Did you play it for the story/character development?"

No it doesn't. I played DSouls for the difficulty mainly, the gameplay is deeply rewarding, and guess what? The framerate had nothing to do with how great the game is at all. The story is there for those who want to see it, the character development is non-existent by design choice, as are many games that are at 30FPS. 60FPS is irrelevant, it doesn't matter, and games like DSouls prove that.

"Also, you might want to check who is skewing who's argument. I never said gameplay didn't matter, and I also never said that a game without 60fps is unplayable."

I'm not skewing anything. I asked you a question in that part of my comment that you're referring to. I never said you specifically said that gameplay didn't matter or that anything under 60FPS was unplayable.

"BUT, to say it doesn't matter would mean that a game would not benefit from it. That is where you are wrong. Developers like Carmack, PD, GG pursue 60fps because it does matter."

Wrong. To say it doesn't matter is to say it's not important for the game to be enjoyable or playable. Of course games can benefit from it, but to whine about the lack of it like it would be a detriment without it is wrong. The majority of games in existence for the entirety of the industry's existence aren't in 60FPS. Are those games suddenly terrible or disadvantaged because of that fact (not saying that you are saying that)? No, of course they aren't. Would those games benefit from a 60FPS framerate? Probably, but does it matter? No, of course not because those games are great without the need of 60FPS.

Did you care if Super Mario World on the SNES was at 60FPS when you played it? Did the fun you have with GTA feel diminished because you weren't playing it at 60FPS?

The issue isn't about benefit. It's about focus and necessity. A game doesn't need 60FPS to be fun, it doesn't need 60FPS to be playable, it doesn't need 60FPS to be great. Would the inclusion of it be good for the game? Yep. Should people be losing their sh*t because it's not in the game? Of course not. That shows a serious problem in what they're looking for in, and why they enjoy, games. At that point it isn't about the core aspects of the game, it's about the technology of the game.

Ducky1035d ago (Edited 1035d ago )

I enjoyed Super Mario World.

From what I remember, it didn't have much of a story, not much character development, and was it something like 480i?

I am sorry, but is this your standard for judging games? You enjoyed something in the past, and therefore think anything beyond it just doesn't matter?

It seems you're forgetting what the background for this discussion is.
The reason 60fps is a topic right now is because of the new hardware.
It wasn't an issue in the recent past because no-one really expected the old hardware to be up to the task, but people expect new hardware to take leaps forward, that includes technical and non-technical aspects.

So, for example, if a game struggles to reach 720p on next-gen hardware, some people will voice their concern, even though 720p, by your definition, "doesn't matter".
Just because someone voices their concern about a technical aspect does not mean that they don't care about the non-technical aspects.
The guy who programs the game doesn't also write the story. Focusing on a game's performance doesn't shift focus from the non-technical parts of the game.

You've mistaken this concern into the illusion that these technical aspects is all that people care about.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1035d ago
HeavenlySnipes1033d ago

You can tell the difference between a 1080p and 720p video easier than you can tell the difference between a 30FPS game and a 60FPS one