• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Trago

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,600
maxresdefault.jpg


Next generation consoles are just over a year away, and with next gen games in development, I'd like for us to discuss one of the major features I think will have the biggest impact on gameplay. Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) will allow for no screen tearing and less judder during gameplay, making dips and less consistent frame rates much more bearable. Since it is likely that both next gen consoles will feature HDMI 2.1, and thus allowing for VRR at the system level, I think it's important that developers consider having and uncapped frame rate option for their games. With HDMI 2.1, the new consoles would also be capable of 4K at 120Hz. It's hard to imagine every game hitting frame rates that high, but once again, with the addition of VRR, I say why not have the option even if the frame rate isn't consistent? It would be a game changer, and I'm sure it could give developers new ways to think about how they design their games with these new features in mind. Let's say there's a major open world title hitting, and said game target 30 fps on consoles. If the game uncapped stays somewhere in the mid 40's, that's still a smoother experience with VRR. The same could be said about multiplayer titles that target 60 fps, but could maybe go higher with an unlocked frame rate.

I do wonder if there are developers who indeed have this in consideration already, but these features are too good not to be in basically every game next gen.
 

Komo

Info Analyst
Verified
Jan 3, 2019
7,106
As much as I wish this to happen I really doubt developers will allow you to do this.
 

Detective Pidgey

Alt Account
Banned
Jun 4, 2019
6,255
I'd be in favor of that too, because Kingdom Hearts 3 for example is a world of difference with it.

Also, isn't MHW also like this? Still I don't see the benefits of it in that game.
 

0ptimusPayne

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,745
I'm honestly expecting a lot of next gen console games to go the Gears 5 route. Dynamic res up to 4K targeting 60fps, after seeing how X/Pro enhancements have been handled for the last couple of years. Can't speak for the smaller studios though, but I'm obviously gonna be on team wait and see at this point. Phew I cannot wait.
 

SeanMN

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,185
I'd love it if next gen games offer options to unlock the frame rate. This is one area were I think including the option can't hurt, and it benefits future Pro/X model consoles.
 
Nov 20, 2017
335
I get why this is important for PC, but Is there a specific benefit to that on console, vs just having a consistent, locked experience?
 

Ploid 6.0

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,439
VRR monitors and TVs should start being the norm especially since it's free to include, and Nvidia allow it to work on their cards now.

Well unfortunately 4K is looking to take focus over VRR TVs, then next it will likely be a push for 8k for whatever reason. Too bad 1440 couldn't have been the standard for the new mid gen consoles, and TVs. With next consoles flirting with ray tracing it's likely they are going to focus on 4k 30fps with some COD and Battle Field multiplayer games focusing on 60 cap.
 

ApeEscaper

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,718
Bangladeshi
Just offer 60fps cap/120fps cap in game settings options. It's not that hard to implement, time to give users more choice, will support any games that offer something like this with moneys
 
OP
OP
Trago

Trago

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,600
VRR monitors and TVs should start being the norm especially since it's free to include, and Nvidia allow it to work on their cards now.

Well unfortunately 4K is looking to take focus over VRR TVs, then next it will likely be a push for 8k for whatever reason. Too bad 1440 couldn't have been the standard for the new mid gen consoles, and TVs. With next consoles flirting with ray tracing it's likely they are going to focus on 4k 30fps with some COD and Battle Field multiplayer games focusing on 60 cap.
With more HDMI 2.1 TV's coming next year, I think availability definitely get better.
 

TitanicFall

Member
Nov 12, 2017
8,255
As an option, sure, but only as an option. Vsync should be enabled by default. The majority of people won't have TVs or monitors to support this functionality.
 

Fisty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,180
Dont forget Boost mode as well, stuff that cant get to 60fps on PS4/Pro could get there with Boost mode on PS5, along with dynamic resolutions hitting their cap and staying there.

I wish dynamic res (with 4K cap) and option for framerate unlock was more common than it is, since that seems to be the best option for future-proofing
 

Deleted member 7948

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,285
VRR monitors and TVs should start being the norm especially since it's free to include, and Nvidia allow it to work on their cards now.

Well unfortunately 4K is looking to take focus over VRR TVs, then next it will likely be a push for 8k for whatever reason. Too bad 1440 couldn't have been the standard for the new mid gen consoles, and TVs. With next consoles flirting with ray tracing it's likely they are going to focus on 4k 30fps with some COD and Battle Field multiplayer games focusing on 60 cap.
And here's the magical thing, 8K requires HDMI 2.1, the same one that supports VRR.
 

Betelgeuse

Member
Nov 2, 2017
2,941
Absolutely.

Providing fps options is also essential for game preservation - as new hardware comes along that is backwards compatible, an increasing number of hard capped games will fail to take advantage of the extra juice that would otherwise allow them to run at higher framerates. I'm primarily talking about games capped at 30 fps.

It's a damn shame more developers aren't including forward-thinking options like the ability uncap framerate, or turn on a 60 fps cap for a 30 fps game. A small sliver of devs will go back to patch these options, but most will be forever capped at 30 when new hardware could be pushing them at least to 60.
 

BeI

Member
Dec 9, 2017
5,966
If anything, I think dynamic resolution of some sort will be utilized more often to hit a solid 60 fps. At least on console. I see PC lagging behind consoles in dynamic resolution, as usual.
 

JFoul

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,783
I think this should be the standard going forward, but there are some games with unlocked |dynamic framerates that should perform a lot better on the next consoles. Other games will probably need the Xbox Enhanced type treatment which would be game by game and require a dedicated team.
 

Ploid 6.0

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,439
And here's the magical thing, 8K requires HDMI 2.1, the same one that supports VRR.
Yeah, but for consoles they will be trying to hit 8k and at the least they will use VRR for 30 - 60fps, like Xbox currently does. I doubt many 8k TVs will go above 60fps outside of the frame doubling thing for sports so the tv manufacturer can say their tv has a 120fps mode on the box.
 

Deleted member 721

User-requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,416
i'm waiting for a 2.1 tv with vrr, that's not very expensive. I think only LG oled has 2.1 isnt?
 

Skyebaron

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
4,416
Id just like for the option of 30, 60 or Uncapped. Some kind of limiter for frametimes sake.
 

Ganondolf

Member
Jan 5, 2018
1,051
will be lucky to get 60fps as standard. the graphics get better and the frame rate stays the same.
 

Alucardx23

Member
Nov 8, 2017
4,711
maxresdefault.jpg


Next generation consoles are just over a year away, and with next gen games in development, I'd like for us to discuss one of the major features I think will have the biggest impact on gameplay. Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) will allow for no screen tearing and less judder during gameplay, making dips and less consistent frame rates much more bearable. Since it is likely that both next gen consoles will feature HDMI 2.1, and thus allowing for VRR at the system level, I think it's important that developers consider having and uncapped frame rate option for their games. With HDMI 2.1, the new consoles would also be capable of 4K at 120Hz. It's hard to imagine every game hitting frame rates that high, but once again, with the addition of VRR, I say why not have the option even if the frame rate isn't consistent? It would be a game changer, and I'm sure it could give developers new ways to think about how they design their games with these new features in mind. Let's say there's a major open world title hitting, and said game target 30 fps on consoles. If the game uncapped stays somewhere in the mid 40's, that's still a smoother experience with VRR. The same could be said about multiplayer titles that target 60 fps, but could maybe go higher with an unlocked frame rate.

I do wonder if there are developers who indeed have this in consideration already, but these features are too good not to be in basically every game next gen.

I saw this as already a given, since Microsoft and Sony confirmed 120fps support. We will definitely see more games with unlocked framerates for next gen.
 

Delusibeta

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,648
That would be nice. Almost certainly won't happen, since it's all but confirmed that raytracing will be the big graphical selling point of the new console generation, and that absolutely murders the frame rate.

I'd like to see more developers adopt graphics customisation on consoles; so that people who want maximum shine juice can have that while people who want a higher frame rate for a more responsive game can also have that. Again, almost certainly won't happen, but it'll be nice to have.
 

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,820
I never understand these comments. Any dev would could target 60fps could also choose to target 30fps with more effects/etc. There will never be a time when every game is 60fps because it's not always about power, but an intentional tradeoff

With VRR you can have arbitrary frame rates. So the binary choice of 30 fps or 60 fps would be gone. A developer could target say 40, 45 or 50 fps for a happy medium. It wouldn't be like now where frame rates between 30 and 60 look horrible because of judder.
 

Zukuu

Member
Oct 30, 2017
6,809
Dude, they struggle to maintain 30 FPS let alone 60 FPS most of the time.
 

Deleted member 58846

User requested account closure
Banned
Jul 28, 2019
5,086
yeah, as much as this alone would sell me on next gen machines, I don't see it happening. Framerate is never a priority for developers.
 

Ze_Shoopuf

Member
Jun 12, 2018
3,926
for next gen i'd be happy if we could just get stable 60fps as a standard for all games.

but we all know even that isn't going to happen.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,700
With VRR you can have arbitrary frame rates. So the binary choice of 30 fps or 60 fps would be gone. A developer could target say 40, 45 or 50 fps for a happy medium. It wouldn't be like now where frame rates between 30 and 60 look horrible because of judder.
My point was that more powerful HW doesn't mean devs will target 60fps. They can always make a tradeoff for a lower framerate, so people always annoyed when a new gen comes and we still get <60fps games never made sense to me
 

Paz

Member
Nov 1, 2017
2,148
Brisbane, Australia
We already put in months of work to make sure our last game had excellent camera and character position interpolation to get the most benefit out of 100+ FPS on high end PCs by actually showing you useful visual updates on every frame regardless of the underlying simulation running at a lower tick rate, so yeah if the consoles support vrr and high FPS of course we would do the work to support them. We spent so much time hitting 60fps on switch, I'm sure other developers are working super hard on this stuff too, if there are options to improve the experience even more than hitting a nice stable locked frame rate (the best option this gen by far) you can be damn sure we will make use of it.

But already there are people in this thread claiming devs don't care about frame rate etc sigh.
 

Ploid 6.0

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,439
I also wish there was a easy way for console gamers to see 100+ fps or popular pc games running at 144hz at a store. Then they would likely want higher frame rates on console more. It's just not easy to see high refresh rate games in the usual shopping locations. The only time I saw it was when I upgraded my monitor. I had a 4k tv that claimed to have 120hz before that but it was some fake frame doubling stuff for sports.

Games feel so good control wise with the high framerates. It's easier to see past a lot of chaos and track things you need to pay attention to as well.
 

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,820
My point was that more powerful HW doesn't mean devs will target 60fps. They can always make a tradeoff for a lower framerate, so people always annoyed when a new gen comes and we still get <60fps games never made sense to me

The point is that people would stop caring about 60 fps. Right now it's a binary choice as anything between 30 and 60 just looks bad in motion. VRR frees devs up to shoot for something that looks better in motion than 30 fps with better graphics than 60 fps. People would likely be much happier with say a 45 fps target than either 30 or 60.
 

laxu

Member
Nov 26, 2017
2,782
I also wish there was a easy way for console gamers to see 100+ fps or popular pc games running at 144hz at a store. Then they would likely want higher frame rates on console more. It's just not easy to see high refresh rate games in the usual shopping locations. The only time I saw it was when I upgraded my monitor. I had a 4k tv that claimed to have 120hz before that but it was some fake frame doubling stuff for sports.

Games feel so good control wise with the high framerates. It's easier to see past a lot of chaos and track things you need to pay attention to as well.

To me the even more important part is feeling how they play. Just so much more responsive overall. Console gamers know this a bit with games that run at 60 fps but VRR does help in spreading that experience to a wider range of framerates while reducing input lag and eliminating tearing.
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
I also wish there was a easy way for console gamers to see 100+ fps or popular pc games running at 144hz at a store. Then they would likely want higher frame rates on console more. It's just not easy to see high refresh rate games in the usual shopping locations. The only time I saw it was when I upgraded my monitor. I had a 4k tv that claimed to have 120hz before that but it was some fake frame doubling stuff for sports.

Games feel so good control wise with the high framerates. It's easier to see past a lot of chaos and track things you need to pay attention to as well.

I'd rather not. As i'm glad console boxes allow devs push their hardware in a variety of ways beyond FPS. And also happy i dont have the mindset of being overly anal about framerates outside of basic stability. Consoles becoming even more like PC's eliminate the entire point. "Options" are inherently contradictory to consoles themselves. Its why PC as a platform is different.

Maybe if you play with a mouse you can get way more use out of higher FPS, but consoles are for TV's and controllers, and the use diminishes significantly without that to begin with
 

edryr

Banned
Feb 15, 2018
126
Dear devs, NEVER ever take into account vrr when optimising your game, unless you have already a perfect framepaced game and stable 30/60 or whatever, and give an uncapped option.
Actually, VRR shouldn't be a thing on consoles.
 

Deleted member 21709

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
23,310
This will never happen until 5 years after high response rate becomes the norm for consumer TV's.. which I can't see happening.