-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Does some people still believe that 60 is not mandatory for next gen consoles?
- Thread starter Cloud-Strife
- Start date
I never used to be particularly bothered about 60fps, until I got a dedicated gaming PC. Now most of the games I play are 60. I recently played through Uncharted: Lost Legacy on PS4 Pro and the drop to 30fps was really, really jarring.
I would take "next gen" consoles sporting the same graphics as current gen but rock solid 4k/60.
Given that next gen is going for 4k, I reckon they'll push the eye candy and do 4k30. If a machine can do 4k30, it should do 1080p60.
It would be great to have but it just is NOT happening. As long as devs have the 30fps with better graphics option they are going to use it.
I think next gen will have 1440p minimum with more 4K games and more 60fps games or ones with that option but in no way are we getting every game released at 4k60
I think next gen will have 1440p minimum with more 4K games and more 60fps games or ones with that option but in no way are we getting every game released at 4k60
If you have standards for how you'd like to play your games, don't expect a closed-platform's one-size-fits-all to meet it.
It doesn't really matter what those standards are. At some point a developer is going to make a decision on resolution, frame-rate, motion blur, chromatic aberration, control layout, visual trade-offs, or anything that goes against what you would do. On a closed-platform they're the dictator, and you just have to deal with it.
It doesn't really matter what those standards are. At some point a developer is going to make a decision on resolution, frame-rate, motion blur, chromatic aberration, control layout, visual trade-offs, or anything that goes against what you would do. On a closed-platform they're the dictator, and you just have to deal with it.
Damn OP check twitter. Every major Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo exec is scrambling because you demand it. It's nice but more often than not they are absolutely going to try and aim for steady 30 fps if it means better visuals in any sense.
What if the devs just would rather have 30? The most popular games aren't always the most visually impressive and 30fps.
It will never be standard as long as it's possible to lower performance for increased visual fidelity.
Even the N64 could have been a "60FPS Console" if Nintendo had mandated it. This is and always will be a design issue rather than a hardware issue (within certain reason).
Even the N64 could have been a "60FPS Console" if Nintendo had mandated it. This is and always will be a design issue rather than a hardware issue (within certain reason).
One advantage of developers targeting 30 on consoles means that the PC version gets to enjoy the better graphics but at 60fps.
I personally prefer they push the envelope on graphics and world, etc, than compromising on the game to run 60 FPS on console. That's what high-end PCs will be for.
For me, it depends on the game. Turn-based RPGs/Strategy, Some Racing and Adventure, Survival, Shooters, are all fine at less than 60fps. Things where the utmost precision matters like fighting games, character action/souls-like, rhythm and platforming need high framerate unless designed around lfr.
If it doesn't look visually impressive, its kinda going to be a hard sell to the consumer. If they're on PC, they can have both and play with mods along the way.
Literally no one in this thread has expressed any such sentiment. Calm down.
I want the devs to make those choices. I would prefer for them all to be in 60fps but if they can't hit that because of some reason then that's ok too.
Literally no one in this thread has expressed any such sentiment. Calm down.
Yeah i mean it's not like there are posts on the first page deriding the masses for not caring or anything.
60 fps will happen more often on games that don't use the extra horsepower due to budget or multiplatforms (like now), but flagship console stuff ends up being 30 fps because its harder to sell graphics if you target higher frame rates as the games will look less impressive than if you didn't by default. I never worry about it on consoles besides having a stable framerate without drops and stuttering. I got my PC for the 144hz stuff.
Yes. How is this even a question? No amount of "horsepower" in these machines will make every game next gen a solid 60 FPS.
I wouldn't ever go to consoles for good graphics standards. I say that as someone who has owned both consoles and PCs for the last 2-3 decades.
Also graphics = frame rate for those still confused.
Also graphics = frame rate for those still confused.
To me, 30 FPS feels almost like a slide show. 24 FPS is fine for movies, but in gaming, no way. I primarily play on PC and I drop all settings to low until I have 100+ FPS. If I don't have 100 FPS, I file it into a category where I will play it once I upgrade my hardware. I make exceptions for turn-based games and games where there's generally not a lot of motion. Also, I might make exceptions for shitty ports of great games if it's one of those "locked at X framerate" type of ports. I will begrudgingly play console exclusives at lower framerates but there's always an uncomfortable adjustment period.
I think you're the only one that believes that, OP. Pure wishful thinking. I'd like for every game to be 60fps as much as the next guy, but some developers will always prioritize fancier graphics.
I don't see 60fps mandated in my lifetime. Either in a literal sense as a manufacturer policy or a mandate from consumers.