Support NeoGAF

[SpongebobSquaredance]

And OoT is better than those two games.
Tony Hawks was SUB 30 fps.

first thing: that's an opinion.

second: Tony hawk was 60 on the PC and on the Dreamcast. and ever since Tony Hawk 3 all the games were 60 fps up until Project 8.

 

[Swift_Star]

So you understood why framerate is more important.

Framerate is importante, but starting at 30, things become a little more subjective. Most people won't notice or feel the difference between 30 or 60, much less >60fps.
fpswhoring is niche. The vast majoriy of people don't care about this.
They care about the game being pretty and fun.
And, oh, GTA V is 30fps across all consoles.

And feels like shit compared to the Tony Hawks running at 60+.

Feeling like shit is subjective. I don't think it feels like shit and those that gave the game a 98 rating and the VAST MAJORITY of people also don't think it feels like shit.
You have to realize fpswhoring is niche.
30fps will always be here. Devs won't ever stop putting 30fps modes in their games.
Make your peace with this.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Games should run at 1FPS max, so that you have more time to enjoy the visuals. /s

LMFAO @ people defending 30FPS, go watch a movie or something, this is a gaming forum.

Yeah. Maybe 0 is too far. 1 max is better.

 

[Swift_Star]

first thing: that's an opinion.

second: Tony hawk was 60 on the PC and on the Dreamcast. and ever since Tony Hawk 3 all the games were 60 fps up until Project 8.

Not an opinion according to the list you yourself provided.
TH was played mostly on PSX, hence that's the version reviewed on the list. The vast majoriy of people played and loved the game at sub 30fps. Same for OoT, same for BOTW.
Same for a lot of games.
Just give up.
60+fps isn't essential.
It never was and it'll never be.
It's time to make peace with this.

 

[Three]

So you understood why framerate is more important.

If its 0fps yeah, at 30fps no I wouldn't care. If somebody made a 240fps game that looked like PS2 graphics and tried to sell me it on the importance of framerate I would laugh. FS2020 is 30fps on Xbox and everybody talks about its graphics not how shit or unplayable it is at 30fps.

 

[Azelover]

I'm sorry, but 60 FPS is more worthy for me.

And let's not act like we never get it, and shouldn't be used to it. VF2 for the Saturn ran at 60FPS. That was what, 27 years ago? Please...

 

[Three]

first thing: that's an opinion.

second: Tony hawk was 60 on the PC and on the Dreamcast. and ever since Tony Hawk 3 all the games were 60 fps up until Project 8.

Those metacritic scores are platform dependent/specific metactric scores. The score you see there is for the PS1 version at sub 30fps.

 

[rodrigolfp]

but starting at 30, things become a little more subjective.

Starting at 30? But you said as OoT has the best score on Metacritic, 20fps should be where it starts.

 

[Swift_Star]

Starting at 30? But you said as OoT has the best score on Metacritic, 20fps should be where it starts.

Ok, then, starting at 20. Happy now? It doesn't change what I said. People ultimately don't care about HFR.
Do I like HFR? Yes.
Will I lose sleep or get angry if a game can't reach 60fps? No.

 

[rodrigolfp]

If its 0fps yeah, at 30fps no I wouldn't care. If somebody made a 240fps game that looked like PS2 graphics and tried to sell me it on the importance of framerate I would laugh. FS2020 is 30fps on Xbox and everybody talks about its graphics not how shit or unplayable it is at 30fps.

Who is everybody? People with their RTX 3090 don't give a single fuck about FS2020 on the Xbox with it's limited 30fps.

 

[ethomaz]

Starting at 30? But you said as OoT has the best score on Metacritic, 20fps should be where it starts.

60fps is good? Yes.
Should I sacrifice visuals for 60fps? No.
OoT was 20fps and nobody cared because it was the game and most comparisons were about how good the graphics looked on N64... the effects used in OoT... nobody cared about it framerate.

What feels and sells next-gen machines are graphics/visuals... not framerate.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Happy now?

No. Why not 15? or 7.5fps as your enjoyment doesn't change no matter the framerate?

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Those metacritic scores are platform dependent/specific metactric scores. The score you see there is for the PS1 version at sub 30fps.

you totally missed the point.

its not about technicalities like platform dependent scores. its about the fact that there are plenty 60 fps games on that list.

 

[ethomaz]

No. Why not 15? or 7.5fps as your enjoyment doesn't change no matter the framerate?

You can't be that obtuse, no?

30fps for two reasons:

- It can divide 60 that is the refresh rate of most TVs.
- It offer a good trade off between response and visuals for the limited console hardware... something 60fps doesn't.

Maybe 40fps is a better sweet trade off place but it doesn't work well in 60Hz displays... just 120Hz displays.
If we have hardware to spare I should say let's standard on 60fps but consoles are limited and you need to give up something.

This generation if you want a game with next-gen visuals you will need to give up that 60fps mote because it needs too many trade offs to archive it.

 

[WhamBamThankYouMaam]

60 fps is a better goal than 30 fps with insane graphics.

 

[Three]

Who is everybody? People with their RTX 3090 don't give a single fuck about FS2020 on the Xbox with it's limited 30fps.

Ok, a lot of xbox users then? FS2020 is CPU bound. You should be talking about people with a good CPU not GPU. A lot of people with a 3090 could barely hit 60fps even on a PC.

Anyway this is clearly about a choice between graphics vs framerate on specific hardware, not whether someone somewhere has more powerful hardware to hit higher framerates.

 

[tassletine]

There's a good DF article about the new Horizon game. In it they said they both preferred the 30fps version.

 

[rodrigolfp]

You can't be that obtuse, no?

30fps for two reasons:

- It can divide 60 that is the refresh rate of most TVs.
- It offer a good trade off between response and visuals... something 60fps doesn't.

Maybe 40fps is a better sweet trade off place but it doesn't work well in 60Hz displays... just 120Hz displays.

Because 60 is divisible by15. Should be ok for frame pacing just like 30. Try for yourself with rivatuner.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

Not an opinion according to the list you yourself provided.
TH was played mostly on PSX, hence that's the version reviewed on the list. The vast majoriy of people played and loved the game at sub 30fps. Same for OoT, same for BOTW.
Same for a lot of games.
Just give up.
60+fps isn't essential.
It never was and it'll never be.
It's time to make peace with this.

the list I've provided is an approximate. are you sure that you realize that? furthermore the argument isn't about whether Tony Hawk has a metascore of 98 and OoT a metascore of 99. the argument is that In the totality of the list, you will find plenty games that had 60 FPS from the get go.

yes, a bunch of people myself included played and enjoyed those games, but we did enjoy those games in spite those frame rates, not because of them.

 

[ethomaz]

Because 60 is divisible by15. Should be ok for frame pacing just like 30. Try for yourself with rivatuner.

It is not a good trade off imo...
It is about trade offs because consoles are limited in hardware power.
60fps will just make your games looks like PS4 games.
15fps will be slow in response time.
30fps will offer a good response time and shining graphics.

 

[Haggard]

Most people won't notice or feel the difference between 30 or 60

If you can`t see the difference you need an appointment with your eye doctor asap


EVERYBODY can see the difference betwen 30 and 60 fps the second they`ve exprienced/seen it once.

 

[ethomaz]

If you can`t see the difference you need an appointment with your eye doctor asap


EVERYBODY can see the difference betwen 30 and 60 the second they`ve been shown it once.

I can notice if you put like that video... different framerate shifting.
The shift makes me realize it is a different framerate.

If you put a single framerate showing I could not tell what it is.

 

[rodrigolfp]

It is not a good trade off imo...

Of course not. Just as 30 vs 60 is not a good trade of too. More is always better.

 

[Haggard]

I can notice if you put like that video... different framerate shifting.

If you put a single framerate showing I could not tell what it is.

if you can`t tell how choppy 30fps camera rotation looks if it`s not heavily masked by motion blur then your eyesight definitely sucks.

 

[Hunnybun]

Framerate is importante, but starting at 30, things become a little more subjective. Most people won't notice or feel the difference between 30 or 60, much less >60fps.
fpswhoring is niche. The vast majoriy of people don't care about this.
They care about the game being pretty and fun.
And, oh, GTA V is 30fps across all consoles.

Feeling like shit is subjective. I don't think it feels like shit and those that gave the game a 98 rating and the VAST MAJORITY of people also don't think it feels like shit.
You have to realize fpswhoring is niche.
30fps will always be here. Devs won't ever stop putting 30fps modes in their games.
Make your peace with this.

What, never?!

Why are some people so insistent about this? It's like some sacred belief or something. At some point the trade off is going to stop being so stark and 60fps will become standard. It's already happening to some extent.

Also, caring about frame rates IS niche, yes, but so is caring about resolution or ray tracing or ultra settings. It's all niche stuff that casual gamers don't even know exists.

Buuuut, otoh, while casual games generally look shit, they also do happen to usually be 60fps... so maybe they do care just a little bit, even if they don't realise it.

 

[ethomaz]

Of course not. Just as 30 vs 60 is not a good trade of too. More is always better.

More is not always better if you left others parts at lower denominators.

2-2-3 is better than 1-1-5 imo.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Really hope 30 fps is dead for good, but I doubt it. I think the way forward is AI upscaling. Easy to get 60 fps + RT when you are rendering at 1080p. The tech will just get better and better.

 

[Three]

you totally missed the point.

its not about technicalities like platform dependent scores. its about the fact that there are plenty 60 fps games on that list.

What you're saying doesn't make sense though. That list of every old game can be 120fps on new hardware/emulators etc. Doesn't take away from the fact that they scored highly despite being sub 30.

you used that list of best games that were scored highly despite being sub 30fps games to try and disprove that historically graphics fidelity hasn't been the selling point but fps has:

Why do you think graphics/visual fidelity have historically been the biggest selling point for next generation consoles over everything else? Huh??? Riddle me that.

I mean, lets take this list for example:

The list had many sub 30fps games in it on the platform they were reviewed for. The top one even being 20fps.

 

[ethomaz]

if you can`t tell how choppy 30fps camera rotation looks if it`s not heavily masked by motion blur then your eyesight definitely sucks.

Actually they are doing their job just fine.
If you are not shifting between different framerate and just started to play in 30fps your eyes should have no issue with it.
Well even if you are shifting your eyes should adapt in few minutes from 60fps to 30fps or vice versa.

I wonder if you have some eyes issues if it is not adapting to 30fps
The common is your eyes to works like I described.

And yes if you show a different framerate in video in intervals of 10 minutes or less for me they will be all the same and I definitivally can't tell what is in each video.
If you show them in sequence I can tell which one is higher or lower.

 

[rodrigolfp]

It is not a good trade off imo...
It is about trade offs because consoles are limited in hardware power.
60fps will just make your games looks like PS4 games.
15fps will be slow in response time.
30fps will offer a good response time and shining graphics.

15 will be half of 30 in response as 30 is half of 60. If 30 is good for you maybe someone will think 15 is good for them. Doesn't make one not being worse than the other...

 

[Represent.]

Play a game with PS1 visuals at 120fps and Flight Simulator 2020 at 0 fps and come back here saying visuals are more important than framerate again.

way to take it to the extreme. no one is saying framerate is not important - its just not as important as visual fidelity. this is a fact and the industry data proves it historically. As well as the fact that visual fidelity is literally always the number 1 selling point of new consoles. NOT framerate. Not AI. Visual fidelity.

 

[palpabl_purpura]

High framerate IS enhanced visual fidelity. Minimal 60 fps needs to be a standard.

 

[rodrigolfp]

way to take it to the extreme. no one is saying framerate is not important - its just not as important as visual fidelity. this is a fact and the industry data proves it historically. As well as the fact that visual fidelity is literally always the number 1 selling point of new consoles. NOT framerate. Not AI. Visual fidelity.

Tell that to the Wii. And if visual fidelity is so important people will only play TLOU2 or RDR2 and run from Fortnite and GTAV.

 

[ChiefDada]

Then with 60 everything looks much clearer and almost tangible, even somehow more three dimensional.

Bingo!

The issue I have between the 30 vs 60 choice is that vfx, which often is the most important aspect of visual appearance to me, gets sacrificed to unacceptable levels. Ratchet RT performance mode kills VFX to the point where the game looks too much like a game, if that makes any sense. I thank the gods over at Insomniac every night for that 4k40 mode.

 

[ethomaz]

High framerate IS enhanced visual fidelity. Minimal 60 fps needs to be a standard.

That is a bullshit... framerate has nothing to do with visual fidelity.
It is about response time.

 

[Hunnybun]

Actually they are doing their job just fine.
If you are not shifting between different framerate and just started to play in 30fps your eyes should have no issue with it.
Well even if you are shifting your eyes should adapt in few minutes from 60fps to 30fps or vice versa.

I wonder if you have some eyes issues if it is not adapting to 30fps
The common is your eyes to works like I described.

And yes if you show a different framerate in video in intervals of 10 minutes or less for me they will be all the same and I definitivally can't tell what is in each video.
If you show them in sequence I can tell which one is higher or lower.

Why do you think the norm is that people can't tell the difference? What's that based on?

I posted an article above that directly contradicts that, btw. 60hz is close to the limit of human perception. That's why 60fps games tend to look dramatically more natural and pleasant. All the evidence I've seen suggests that you're the outlier.

 

[Riky]

Flight Simulator on Xbox actually runs between 45-60fps, it needs to detect a VRR display to unlock the framerate though.

 

[ethomaz]

Why do you think the norm is that people can't tell the difference? What's that based on?

I posted an article above that directly contradicts that, btw. 60hz is close to the limit of human perception. That's why 60fps games tend to look dramatically more natural and pleasant. All the evidence I've seen suggests that you're the outlier.

These article all use shifting to ask people... a big issue in the methodology.
Like I said I can tell you which one is higher or lower framerate if you keep showing me different framerate videos because my eyes will try to adapt each video shift.

If I wake up and start a game no matter if it is 30, 60, 120, etc I can't tell you what it is.
Our eyes are fabulous doing that.

 

[MiguelItUp]

Lmao, it's not killing graphical fidelity at all IMO. But there are other graphical toggles that can appear to. Blur, for instance, is absolute garbage and I usually remove it. However, there have been some devs that implemented blur pretty decently.

 

[SpongebobSquaredance]

The list had many sub 30fps games in it on the platform they were reviewed for. The top one even being 20fps.

yes, but I don't argue about the quality of those games or that there aren't sub 30 FPS games on that list.

you used that list of best games that were scored highly despite being sub 30fps games to try and disprove that historically graphics fidelity hasn't been the selling point but fps has:

complete and utter bollocks.

What you're saying doesn't make sense though.

It most certainly does. When someone says "great industry pushing graphics have always been the number one reason why something sells in this industry," and then someone else provides an approx. list of "the best games of all time," which includes several games with 60 FPS and games that don't go for graphical fidelity, that take is completely nullified.

 

[BigBooper]

Actually they are doing their job just fine.
If you are not shifting between different framerate and just started to play in 30fps your eyes should have no issue with it.
Well even if you are shifting your eyes should adapt in few minutes from 60fps to 30fps or vice versa.

I wonder if you have some eyes issues if it is not adapting to 30fps
The common is your eyes to works like I described.

And yes if you show a different framerate in video in intervals of 10 minutes or less for me they will be all the same and I definitivally can't tell what is in each video.
If you show them in sequence I can tell which one is higher or lower.

Haggard
Your eyes might be too good.

 

[Filben]

I'm always for options. Those who prefer better and more responsive controls and motion resolution and fidelity can choose 60fps, especially in games with LOTS of motion. And those who prefer general visual fidelity and want to sacrifice the aforementioned can opt in for 30fps. I don't see why this is even still an issue many devs still don't tackle and won't go the extra mile to include both options.

 

[ethomaz]

H Haggar Your eyes might be too good.

I have astigmatism before... 15 years ago.
Nodays it is normal.

What surprises me is people saying their eyes can't adapt lol
That goes against the function of your eyes.

But hey everything is a excuse to defense 60fps in trade off for IQ.

I should love to not have any trade off on consoles for 60fps that is better for response time than 30fps but the actual hardware doesn't allow it (and it will probably never allow).

 

[Hunnybun]

These article all use shifting to ask people... a big issue in the methodology.
Like I said I can tell you which one is higher or lower framerate if you keep showing me different framerate videos because my eyes will try to adapt each video shift.

If I wake up and start a game no matter if it is 30, 60, 120, etc I can't tell you what it is.
Our eyes are fabulous doing that.

Yeah, I get that YOU personally can't tell the difference. What I don't understand is why you seem so sure that other people are the same?

 

[Represent.]

Tell that to the Wii.

Traditional consoles, which Wii was not. And they still use Bullshots to market their games. Like every company ever. Because fidelity is important.

 

[ethomaz]

Yeah, I get that YOU personally can't tell the difference. What I don't understand is why you seem so sure that other people are the same?

Because it is a normal behavior of our eyes.
Your eyes will easy adapt to visual perception you are looking at.
The same happens with low or high lighting.

Are you human, no?

 

[rodrigolfp]

Traditional consoles, which Wii was not. And they still use Bullshots to market their games. Like every company ever. Because fidelity is important.

Thanks for the laughs.

 

[Represent.]

High framerate IS enhanced visual fidelity. Minimal 60 fps needs to be a standard.

No. It isn't. Its about response time. The games objectively look worse at 60 than 30. This is a fact and not an opinion.
Thats the whole point of 30FPS... better visual fidelity. Better resolution. More detail. And in todays market, Ray Tracing. The games look better. Thats why its marketed as QUALITY mode.

 

[Hunnybun]

Because it is a normal behavior of our eyes.
Your eyes will easy adapt to visual perception you are looking at.
The same happens with low or high lighting.

Are you human, no?

Based on what? Do you not see all the people just in this thread who clearly don't just adapt?

Because otherwise we wouldn't want higher frame rates, would we?

 

[bentanchorbolt]

No.

60fps is part of the fidelity as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't matter how pretty or high res the visuals are if the game runs like a slideshow. Anyone who plays most of their games at 60 or higher will find 30 to be positively jarring.