DragonKnight (User)

  • Contributor
  • 9 bubbles
  • 9 in CRank
  • Score: 179530
"Respect is not something to just be given. It is the result of accepting principles as worthwhile."

Get Over 60FPS Because It Doesn't Matter

DragonKnight | 789d ago
User blog

*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.

« 1 2 »
zerocrossing  +   789d 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.
#1 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(14) | Report | Reply
DragonKnight  +   789d 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-hollow  +   789d 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.
RobbyGrob  +   788d 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.
#1.1.2 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(6) | Report
Bundi  +   787d 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.
XB1_PS4  +   786d ago
yaz288  +   789d 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.
zerocrossing  +   789d ago
60FPS may improve some games, but it's certainly not a "requirement".
HeavenlySnipes  +   787d 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)
CrossingEden  +   788d ago
Frames per second didn't affect anything in DmC, if it did, videos like this wouldn't exist on consoles.
JackVagina  +   787d ago
No point in trying to fight with DMC haters, their minds are already made up
rainslacker  +   788d 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.
#1.4 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(10) | Report | Reply
MEsoJD  +   786d 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...
#1.5 (Edited 786d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
MEsoJD  +   786d ago
Here's also a download showcasing Dark Souls running at 60fps.

Yes, it's so beautiful and smooth. :3
XboxFun   789d ago | Off topic | show | Replies(2)
wtopez  +   789d ago
It doesn't matter, huh? Oh boy...
MidnytRain  +   788d 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  +   789d 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
DragonKnight  +   789d 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.
#4.1 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(25) | Report | Reply
Jovanian  +   789d 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  +   789d 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
DragonKnight  +   789d 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.
Ducky  +   789d 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.
#5 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
DragonKnight  +   789d 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.
#5.1 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(19) | Report | Reply
Ducky  +   789d 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.
#5.1.1 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(2) | Report
Ducky  +   789d 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.
DragonKnight  +   789d 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.
Ducky  +   789d 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.
#5.1.4 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(2) | Report
HeavenlySnipes  +   787d 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
WarThunder  +   789d ago
"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 agree!

People forget to mention next gen games have better lighting better particles better physics and all these can effect the FPS...

Imo i think 1080p and everything that is 30fps or above is good.
#6 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
hakis86  +   788d ago
I am happy that the new gen will deliver 1080p (mostly) and 30 or 60 FPS. Some games do shine only when at 60FPS, that's my opinion.
But I like a lot of 30FPS games - as long as the framerate is stable 30FPS and there is no screen tearing.

Screen tearing is horrible.

The following can NOT be unseen!!Read at your own risk...:

I've been watching a lot of movies on my 2012 LEDLCD TV, these are Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming and TV broadcast. The juddering on TVs is horrible - have seen this on many different makes and models. Activating "supersmoothmyimageplz&qu ot; resolves the juddering, but creates artefacts in the image which is not good (and this can't be used while gaming because it adds latency/can't be activated in "game" mode)

This is why I also like games to be 60FPS - matching the 60Hz refreshrate of you TV/PC monitor; there is no juddering. Anybody else notice this?
_QQ_  +   787d ago
when it comes to the technical side, performance>all. 60FPS>1080P
#6.2 (Edited 787d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Convas  +   789d ago
Suddenly, 60FPS no longer matter.

DragonKnight  +   789d ago
No suddenly about it. It's never mattered. If your implication is that I'm only saying this due to some PS4 game, you'd be wrong. My inspiration for this actually came from Watch Dogs, a cross gen multiplat game that's open world and doesn't need 60FPS yet people are b*tching about it being at 30FPS like it's suddenly unplayable.

FPS is irrelevant unless it dips to the point of being unplayable, and 30FPS is far from that.
_QQ_  +   787d ago
Do you know why it matters? because Fanboys love to talk about how their perfect system is just so powerful,so perfect, yet the fact that developers have to compromise things like 60 frames proves it isn't that powerful after all.

So sure lets say it doesn't matter,but that doesn't change the facts. Your big bad nextgen, all powerful, allmighty system is to weak to do it.Time to come back to reality fanboys.
XboxFun  +   789d ago
I wonder if we can get a blog from Dragon about this particular issue:


It seems everyone forgives the 60fps incident but everyone jumps for joy when a poly count is confirmed lowered.

When a POLY count is confirmed to be lowered...think about that for a moment. I personally want Dragon to write a blog on why that doesn't matter because you are so thorough and convincing in your rescue acts when it comes to Sony. We definitely need that applied to this situation.
DragonKnight  +   789d ago
Not going to write a blog about it. It's a ridiculously pathetic non-issue that people are whining about, but it's pervasiveness hasn't reached the level of the 60FPS arguments. Besides, the blog would be too similar to this one and wouldn't be put through as reports would claim that I could have made this blog longer by including both aspects.

And, I also did mention it in passing in this blog here:

"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."

So there you go. You can take your trolling, Xbox One victim act somewhere else now.

"Obviously the door here is only wide open for the Recovering Sony Troll Victims."

So what part of my blog talks about Sony or the PS4 in any way? Thanks for admitting your Xbox One trolling fanboyism though.
#8.1 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
XboxFun  +   789d ago
"So there you go. You can take your trolling, Xbox One victim act somewhere else now."

Obviously the door here is only wide open for the Recovering Sony Troll Victims.
Welcome2Die  +   788d ago
Oh really? So that guy Jokesonyou who is an avid Xbox fanboy has about 8 bubbles does he deserve it?
Oh wait of course he doesnt because N4G is full of Sony fanboys and anybody thats speaks against that gets their bubbles taken!
Anyone that has less than 5 bubbles is being a troll, there really is no reason to drop in bubbles for speaking your mind...
#8.1.2 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
Welcome2Die  +   788d ago
See this is why you only have 2 bubbles...
DoctorJones  +   788d ago
Because he speaks his mind and others don't like it?

The bubble system is just a flawed popularity contest. You could get a load of bubbles very easily if you pandered to a certain group on here.

Some people deserve a lot of bubbles but there are some people that don't deserve them at all.
#8.2.1 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
wishingW3L   789d ago | Immature | show | Replies(2)
Software_Lover  +   789d ago
Games at 30FPS are not automatically bad. Games at 60FPS are not automatically good. If that were the case then no one should have purchased hardly any games this gen as hardly anything was 60fps.

People are already dismissing entire games for next gen, THAT THEY HAVEN'T EVEN PLAYED YET, because of some internet jargon about 60fps. Most, not all, MOST, people on this website couldn't even tell you the FPS of the games they play now if it weren't on the internet. They could tell you if a game was good or not though.

I approve of this blog...

Edit: All of this is up to developers. COD ran at 60fps yes, but they sacrificed their GRAPHICS, you know, the thing many of you blast them about everyday for that. They could have upgraded aspects of their engine and made things prettier, but that would have sacrificed in the FPS department.

It's gonna be a lose/lose situation for alot of devs next gen if people continue to be like this.
#10 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
DragonKnight  +   789d ago
Ssshhh, you're not allowed to say that people couldn't tell you the FPS of a game or wishingW3L will call you an idiot.

But you're completely right. Until someone has, with their own knowledge, experienced a certain framerate with consistency, they won't be able to point out the difference between framerates unless they are choppy. The nature of the human eye isn't to make that distinction on its own, it has to be trained to under proper conditions due to what goes into being able to see at varying framerates. I mean hell, if your eyes are dry you could potentially see at a lower framerate than someone whose eyes aren't. But I digress.

"All of this is up to developers. COD ran at 60fps yes, but they sacrificed their GRAPHICS, you know, the thing many of you blast them about everyday for that. They could have upgraded aspects of their engine and made things prettier, but that would have sacrificed in the FPS department."

This is what I'm talking about. Too many people ignore why certain aspects are included and others excluded in favour of just b*tching about resolution or framerate or polygon counts. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if some devs just said "F*ck this" and just stopped due to the unimportant cry fests from the framerate fanboys.
rainslacker  +   788d ago
Frame rate is one of those things you notice when it's bad, just because it tends to be jarring. If the frame update is tied to the input loop, then it can cause input issues where things don't happen when they should based on the frame...particularly true in fighting games, which is why fighting games have locked frame rates.

But I agree, most people if you sat them down and showed them the same game, one running at 30, and one running at 60, they wouldn't be able to tell the difference without a little meter in the corner telling them the truth. Probably the same way most people wouldn't know if an image is 900P or 1080P unless their TV told them so.

60 fps was never necessary, unless the frame rate wasn't locked. In that scenario, it just means it's unlikely to stutter the frames if it drops too low.
Erudito87  +   789d ago
in gaming it matters. 60 fps is king for gaming. i have a pc that plays everything in 120 fps and i dont notice the difference between 60 to 120 but 30 to 60 theres a massive difference.
JOHN_DOH  +   786d ago
you need a monitor that supports true 120 fps. Most monitors and TVs are 60hz so it will look the same as 60 frames even if you can get 100+fps. The TVs that say they are 120hz or 240hz are just using some kind of frame interpolation trick .
#11.1 (Edited 786d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Erudito87  +   786d ago
I have a 120hz monitor. The asus vg236h
SlapHappyJesus  +   789d ago
60 fps keep a clear image when moving fast. Seriously, lock a game at 30 and then spin. Then lock at 60 and spin. Tell me how much clearer it was the second time.
Not to mention it just makes the overall experience feel so much smoother. I feel it is pretty much a needed for shooters.
There is a reason that I moved on to PC gaming late this generation. What was on offer just wasn't cutting it for me anymore. Seeing what I keep seeing for even the coming generation, I feel like made the move at a smart time.
#12 (Edited 789d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
UncleGermrod  +   786d ago
As a console gamer I have always noticed this difference BIG TIME when going from CoD to Battlefield. I can't argue that 60 frames isn't noticeably smoother, but I can argue that most people wouldn't know or care unless they swtiched back and for between 2 similair games in a short time span or play games at 60 frames very often.

I think that it really does depend on the game. I think that for this generation, 60fps should be the standard for fast paced shooters/racers. But if an action title that doesn't tend to play too quickly, 30 should be fine as long as it is justified by higher res etc.

I also think that as devs get better with the new systems more games will reach 60 frames.

As far as the whole console war goes, I think both should be capable of 60 frames, even if it means the xbox one version takes a small hit to resolution for certain multiplats.

Moral of the story is...Fps is probably getting a little too much attention, especially from gamers who won't even really end up realizing the difference most of the times.
Godlovesgamers  +   789d ago
60fps does matter as our eyes see things much faster than that, so in turn if the frame rate is faster it adds more immersion to the experience, depending on the game it comes across as more realistic, more like reality.

Taking a screenshot of a game in 30fps and 60fps is not a good illustration, unless you're just trying to be purposefully ignorant. A better way would be to do a 5 or 10 sec vid comparison of the same things, then you would really be able to see how fluid and smooth 60fps is compared to 30fps.
iliimaster  +   789d ago
well damn when should consoles go 60fps then? ps6 i dont get it its 2013 about to be 2014 games should be running 60fps just because they can period they are marketing these consoles like the future and us customers expect nothing less
BillytheBarbarian  +   789d ago
60fps isn't necessary but its awesome when it can happen. The end.
CrossingEden  +   788d ago
Infamous second son is a prime example of why 60fps doesn't matter and proof that console fanboys can't tell the difference considering half of them believe it's running at 60fps despite the tech analysis and the developers saying otherwise. I think it's about time ps4 fanboys especially stop pretending like the ps4=a high end $1,000 gaming rig.
#16 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
KwietStorm  +   788d ago
I sure as hell would never say it doesn't matter, because it definitely does, but people playing the specs game do need to stop acting like 1080p60 is the holy grail of everything or else the game/console sucks. It didn't matter to them before certain execs and fanboys on the net got real vocal, because they were just enjoying the game. This should be the case as always, but I'm not going to act like a higher frame rate isn't welcome either. Same thing goes with resolution. Nobody can look at a screen and automatically know the exact number ratio a game is running at, and if sites like digitalfoundry and lensoftruth didn't exist, most would never have known the many high profile games that ran sub-HD native this very generation.
UncleGermrod  +   786d ago
I agree. I think the main thing about the next gen is that games will look better, a lot better. So while we should expect to see many 60fps games, it shouldn't be too big a deal when some games do not achieve this.

People forget that as hardware gets more powerful, games become more technically demanding. For many of these newer, more technically demanding games to run at 1080p/60 frames, the consoles would probably have to cost at least a couple hundred more bucks to make it possible. That being said, the new consoles will obviously contain the power to make very pretty games while offering up better online functionality and more impressive feature sets all around...that to me is what makes this next gen exciting, not all the specs/numbers.
urwifeminder  +   788d ago
The change for me on pc was noticeable from 30 to 60 screen tearing being the main problem as most modern HDTVs are 60hrz and above.
Soc5  +   788d ago
Love a post that starts with "you are all idiots and I'm going to explain why" Must be hard knowing everything surrounded by a sea of ignorance O great knowing one.

Wow read more of your post, now you're telling people to "shut up" you're kind of abusive, reminds me of that frat girl who went crazy and wrote a letter to all her sorority mates, look it up. You might get more people to listen if you toned it down a little.
#19 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Megaton  +   788d ago
I usually agree with you, but this is easily one of the most moronic blogs I've ever seen on this site.
BitbyDeath  +   788d ago
It depends on your eyesight, some people won't see a difference between 30FPS and 60FPS while others do.
Welcome2Die  +   788d ago
Honestly I never even notice the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS and I play fighting games.
maniacmayhem  +   788d ago
60 fps and 30 fps might not matter depending on what game is being played. That I will only agree with. But if you can't see the difference then you are only fooling yourself.

Play CoD and then BF3 and you will instantly see the difference. Not saying one is better than the other because they both have their strengths but any legitimate person will tell you that CoD is faster and more fluid when it comes to it's combat.

Instead of writing a blog specifically targeting an issue that was only brought up for a certain camp you should have broaden it about the insane amount on fanboy crying that happens on this site.

Whether it be the FCC report, 8 gigs of RAM and the now hilariously decreased poly count. These non issues need to be expressed across the board for everyone.
zero_gamer  +   788d ago
There is nothing wrong with wanting more. 60FPS gaming for a next-gen was what we've been wanting since long before the announcement of the Wii U, let alone PS4 and XBone. We're not getting that, or at least we won't in the majority of next-gen games. Anyone that experienced 60FPS gaming knows why they want it on a next-gen console, but unfortunately all we have is a game industry that values graphics over the performance of a game.
JeepGamer  +   788d ago
I've tried for years to tell people that their eyes are incapable of telling the difference between anything over 50 most of the time and anything over 70 any of the time and yet they will swear they can.
iamgoatman  +   788d ago
That's because they can, and you're wrong.

Can't really make it any simpler.
Ducky  +   788d ago
I've been trying for years to explain to people that their eyes are incapable of seeing more than 6 colours, but they still swear they can see more colours.

Oh well, I guess you just can't beat sense into some people no matter how hard you try.
WarThunder  +   788d ago

to the human eye, fluid motion is anything above 24fps (or 29.97 fps for NTSC). So that means 30fps, 60fps will pretty much look the same to you.
The concern is if it dips below 30fps then yeah, it will be choppy. But if you always get 30fps, I don't think there is any need to worry about fps.
DoctorJones  +   788d ago
The crap people come out with never ceases to amaze me. The denial about framerate from some people is astounding, your eyes are more capable than you give them credit for.

The thing is, this is supposed to be the next generation of consoles, they are more powerful and 60fps is undeniably smoother than 30fps, why are we still using 30fps as the golden standard for gaming?

These consoles are supposed to be cutting edge tech, and with all the supposed Console Optimization™ shouldn't we expect 60fps as standard?

A game played at 60fps will always be a more enjoyable experience, it is smoother and is the optimal way to play games. Just because you're happy to play a game at 30fps doesn't mean it wouldn't be better (certainly from a gameplay perspective) to have played it in 60fps.

Denial is the word for this blog.
Bladesfist  +   788d ago
Stop making up carp about the human eye. The eye does not see in frames per second.



Are you seriously saying you can't notice the difference? Even just watching these you can tell what is what and when input and rendering are normally done in a cycle 60fps makes everything FEEL smoother.
BitbyDeath  +   788d ago
Perfect example on that last link.
No difference at all between 30FPS and 60FPS. If you can see a difference then it is you.
Petro  +   788d ago
Get your eyes checked, the difference is clear.
BitbyDeath  +   787d ago
If you can see a problem then that is the problem.
#26.1.2 (Edited 787d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(6) | Report
Petro  +   787d ago
Seriously take a look at this http://frames-per-second.ap... adjust the other ball to 30 FPS and if you still cant see the difference between 30 and 60, then I possibly could believe that there is at least one human that cant see the difference.
memots  +   788d ago
Forget about DK ,

I've been saying the same thing in my comments and I get massive disagree for it.
Never mind that 90% of games out there are not 60fps and I still enjoyed them.

I just posted this in an article about that kinect fitness stuff. Just to show are retard you guys sound.

kinect Fitness
Wonder how many polygon she's made off, and this better be 60fps or bust, and no up scaling bullshit either.

That's right I'm being sarcastic but unfortunately it's seems that all everyone cares about now.
#5(Edited 0m ago) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply | Edit
#27 (Edited 788d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
EXVirtual  +   788d ago
1080p 60fps is great and devs should target it, but it's not mandate.
I wouldn't say it doesn't matter, but it isn't something that must ALWAYS happen.
DW74  +   788d ago
I've always stuck to the opinion that 30+ is fine by me. Once things dive under 30, well, that's no bueno. And this comes from a PC gamer.

I'd rather dial up all the graphical bells and whistles and run at 30, than dial everything back to run at 60. But, to each their own.
Roccetarius  +   788d ago
I have to admit, Dragon. Lately you've been going deeper and deeper into some kind of black hole. It's saddening to see, that even people like you can't stay on the right path.

Anyways, 60fps matters to me, because it overall makes the experience more enjoyable.
BillytheBarbarian  +   787d ago
Glad to know it wasn't just me.
PurpHerbison  +   787d ago
60FPS all the way. It's not like 30 FPS is all that bad when it's constantly 30FPS... All games claiming to be 30 FPS have nasty FPS dips.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

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