Support NeoGAF

[rofif]

You

People who think we will be stuck with 30 fps forever need to learn how to dream bigger.

The demand for 60 fps on console is here and it's not going away. It's only so long compines are going to want to deal with the bad pr of not having a proformance mode option in games.

Framerate is a high priority on a lot of gamers list, and 30 fps bros are looking like the minority.

you really don’t think devs wouldn’t create 60fps games always? They don’t because they prefer pushing other areas. Graphics and tech.
30 fps is acceptable because your brain and eyes never changed. Just as 24fps movies from 50 years ago are watchable.
30 is just an ok number. Not 20. That’s too little. Otherwise we would play at that.
Graphics move forward, tv tech moves forward. Games look better and better because hardware gets better.

But at no point 30fps can become unplayable. It’s not something that can get old.
You don’t raise speed limit to 200kph because cars now can drive that fast.
You don’t game at 16k either because tv size peaked at what it is and we don’t need more then What we use now.

 

[Madserb2023]

Been playing TOTK so I can deal with the 30fps and will do the same for Stardield, but given the option I will choose 60. It might be possible that some people's brains just don't notice the difference. I can't understand how you can't use an inverted camera for FPS games.

 

[Gudji]

Been playing TOTK so I can deal with the 30fps and will do the same for Stardield, but given the option I will choose 60. It might be possible that some people's brains just don't notice the difference. I can't understand how you can't use an inverted camera for FPS games.

Inverted is the only way really.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

You

you really don’t think devs wouldn’t create 60fps games always? They don’t because they prefer pushing other areas. Graphics and tech.
30 fps is acceptable because your brain and eyes never changed. Just as 24fps movies from 50 years ago are watchable.
30 is just an ok number. Not 20. That’s too little. Otherwise we would play at that.
Graphics move forward, tv tech moves forward. Games look better and better because hardware gets better.

But at no point 30fps can become unplayable. It’s not something that can get old.
You don’t raise speed limit to 200kph because cars now can drive that fast.
You don’t game at 16k either because tv size peaked at what it is and we don’t need more then What we use now.

That's the thing, we have moved forward in so many other areas, why not framerate? Tech gets better and better and yet we have been stuck at 30 fps for decades on console. As a mainly a console gamer, I'm sick of it.

You are right, 30 fps is alright, but alright is no long good enough.

 

[Amory]

I can live with the odd 30 fps game if it's really pushing the graphics tech forward. for most games it's a negligible difference and I'd much rather have 60 fps in performance mode than 4k and ray tracing or whatever.

60 FPS just feels nicer

 

[rofif]

That's the thing, we have moved forward in so many other areas, why not framerate? Tech gets better and better and yet we have been stuck at 30 fps for decades on console. As a mainly a console gamer, I'm sick of it.

You are right, 30 fps is alright, but alright is no long good enough.

We are upping graphics and resolution because we can achieve better graphics and have bigger tvs.
30fps still does the same thing to your eyes, it did 30 years ago.
The standards argument is bs.

 

[Guilty_AI]

The main issue i heve is when theres nothing that justifies the poor performance. I played Ctrl Alt Ego and that game can't maintain 60 fps for nothing despite decent rig and looking very basic. But i didn't mind because the game had tons of interweaved systems, big levels that remembered the position and stats of every single object.

Then you look at Forspoken. Basic visuals, empty world, simple mechanics that have been done again and again, still perform horridly for some reason. That i take issue with.

 

[rofif]

The main issue i heve is when theres nothing that justifies the poor performance. I played Ctrl Alt Ego and that game can't maintain 60 fps for nothing despite decent rig and looking very basic. But i didn't mind because the game had tons of interweaved systems, big levels that remembered the position and stats of every single object.

Then you look at Forspoken. Basic visuals, empty world, simple mechanics that have been done again and again, still perform horridly for some reason. That i take issue with.

Forspoken launched with bad performance but was patched and is good now.
But You don't get to tell me this is bad visuals. wtf man. The game looked breathtaking sometimes. Not HFW, ff16 or tlou2 but still very good graphics.
let alone when you play it with HDR on an oled screen. The game looked fantastic.... and it was a good game. Very good.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

We are upping graphics and resolution because we can achieve better graphics and have bigger tvs.
30fps still does the same thing to your eyes, it did 30 years ago.
The standards argument is bs.

Lmao, how is the standards argument bs?

TVs have also advanced, so no, 30 fps doesn't look the same as it did 30 years ago.

Saying the things you say about framerate about anything else sounds crazy.

 

[Balducci30]

That's the thing, we have moved forward in so many other areas, why not framerate? Tech gets better and better and yet we have been stuck at 30 fps for decades on console. As a mainly a console gamer, I'm sick of it.

You are right, 30 fps is alright, but alright is no long good enough.

No one is saying 30 FPS is better than 60 FPS. Just that many people are willing, myself included, to sacrifice 60 for 30 - and to sacrifice 4k - if it means the game can push the boundaries of what we’ve seen visually or otherwise - see: LOU 2, TOTK. TOTK wouldn’t be possible on the switch without the compromises it made to resolution and framerate, neither would LOU 2 on Ps4. I want to see games like that this generation.

Now if you’re not pushing anything, sure you should get blasted. If Xbox came out and said Avowed or something was restricted to 30 - that would be an issue. Redfall did not justify being 30 FPS at all - that game deserved the shit it got.

 

[rofif]

Lmao, how is the standards argument bs?

TVs have also advanced, so no, 30 fps doesn't look the same as it did 30 years ago.

Saying the things you say about framerate about anything else sounds crazy.

You are right. 30fps doesnt look the same as it did 30 years ago. It looks better with amazing graphics and high quality motion blur on a huge tv.
You eyes did not got faster in last 30 years. 30fps is still what it is. Your higher standards is bs because its not true. Its something you keep telling yourself. it makes no sense

 

[DeepEnigma]

Thank you all for surprisingly very positive reaction to this thread all things considered!

A contrast to the last time you made a thread or had identical discussions like this a year ago or less. I wonder what changed?

 

[Roxkis_ii]

No one is saying 30 FPS is better than 60 FPS. Just that many people are willing, myself included, to sacrifice 60 for 30 - and to sacrifice 4k - if it means the game can push the boundaries of what we’ve seen visually or otherwise - see: LOU 2, TOTK. TOTK wouldn’t be possible on the switch without the compromises it made to resolution and framerate, neither would LOU 2 on Ps4. I want to see games like that this generation.

Now if you’re not pushing anything, sure you should get blasted. If Xbox came out and said Avowed or something was restricted to 30 - that would be an issue. Redfall did not justify being 30 FPS at all - that game deserved the shit it got.

I assuming you meant "aren't will to sacrifice for 60 fps"

That is completely understandable, that's why I advocate for the graphics and performance mode options on console. That way, everyone can get what they want. One day we may even be able to get pretty visuals with 60 fps and we can all be happy.

 

[rofif]

A contrast to the last time you made a thread or had identical discussions like this a year ago or less. I wonder what changed?

Yes I remember that. No idea.
There are still many negative opinions but in general not as much as I expected based on last time.
People grow up and realize there are more and less important things than they previously thought. not sure.
I was a performance schizo myself but I just don't care anymore. Igrnorance is bliss and I just realized that one day maybe

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yes I remember that. No idea.
There are still many negative opinions but in general not as much as I expected based on last time.
People grow up and realize there are more and less important things than they previously thought. not sure.
I was a performance schizo myself but I just don't care anymore. Igrnorance is bliss and I just realized that one day maybe

We must look to the stars for answers.

 

[skit_data]

I would have agreed with the premise of the thread 2 years or so ago because back then I had an old LCD TV but ever since I got my OLED 30 fps has gone from "not optimal, but definitely playable" to "omg, this feels like a slideshow".

30fps definitely feels way worse on OLED, something I didn't know when I bought it. I love the deep blacks and all other good stuff that comes with it but all sub 60fps content looks worse than on my old LCD tbh. I rarely use it for movies but at least in those cases it's possible to use post processing effects. I definitely notice it when using my PS3, the XMB interface looks better than ever but the games looks worse than ever.

Edit: Got a bit curious why exactly OLED feels worse so I googled the subject. Apparently it's due to the pixel response time being so fast on OLED leading to less smooth transitions between frames. Pretty funny that something that in theory sounds better in every way leads to such negative effects.

 

[Represent.]

Anyone willing to sacrifice fidelity, art, game design, game scope, etc,..... for improved.... input lag needs to hop on this thing and fly far away from this planet.

30FPS allows for superior games.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

You are right. 30fps doesnt look the same as it did 30 years ago. It looks better with amazing graphics and high quality motion blur on a huge tv.
You eyes did not got faster in last 30 years. 30fps is still what it is. Your higher standards is bs because its not true. Its something you keep telling yourself. it makes no sense

If someone has been eating shit sandwichs all their life, then one day they get to eat a normal sandwich and it's the best thing they ever ate, which sandwish do you think that person would want for their next meal?

 

[Guilty_AI]

Forspoken launched with bad performance but was patched and is good now.
But You don't get to tell me this is bad visuals. wtf man. The game looked breathtaking sometimes. Not HFW, ff16 or tlou2 but still very good graphics.
let alone when you play it with HDR on an oled screen. The game looked fantastic.... and it was a good game. Very good.

You kinda proved my point when you brought up last gen games.

 

[Topher]

Best thread talking about not wanting to to talk about something I've seen in a while.

 

[adamsapple]

Best thread talking about not wanting to to talk about something I've seen in a while.

I am so tired of people sending me money on paypal.

 

[diffusionx]

People who think we will be stuck with 30 fps forever need to learn how to dream bigger.

The demand for 60 fps on console is here and it's not going away. It's only so long compines are going to want to deal with the bad pr of not having a proformance mode option in games.

Framerate is a high priority on a lot of gamers list, and 30 fps bros are looking like the minority.

This hardware is fixed. To simplify things, either you can have next-gen graphics at 30fps or you can have last-gen graphics at 60fps. You can't have both. These consoles are not 50x better than the prior gen, you just do not get that level of economy of scale anymore when you are selling a $500 box. No matter what gamers whine about, this is just basic fundamental reality.

Everyone was blown away by something like Avatar, that's because, well, it looked like a next-gen game. It also ran at 30fps. That's the way it goes, and the way it will go, unless you want to shell out $1600 for a 4090.

 

[Ainem Enamas]

It usually astonishes me on how are the developers using this console hardware.

 

[Balducci30]

I assuming you meant "aren't will to sacrifice for 60 fps"

That is completely understandable, that's why I advocate for the graphics and performance mode options on console. That way, everyone can get what they want. One day we may even be able to get pretty visuals with 60 fps and we can all be happy.

I just don’t think it’s totally feasible to expect that in the console space where you you have fixed hardware for near a decade - the main thing that’s allowed consoles to compete with PC over the past decades, is that despite being weaker, the developers didn’t have to split focus and target multiple settings and configurations - they just honed in on the hardware and a single performance target. It’s why the series s is problematic imo

 

[Roxkis_ii]

I just don’t think it’s totally feasible to expect that in the console space where you you have fixed hardware for near a decade - the main thing that’s allowed consoles to compete with PC over the past decades, is that despite being weaker, the developers didn’t have to split focus and target multiple settings and configurations - they just honed in on the hardware and a single performance target. It’s why the series s is problematic imo

Do PC devs have to split their focus when they give you options to configure how a game runs on your system? There are of more pc configuration then console, and yet devs are able to accommodate those thousands of configurations. I have faith that most devs can turn off some bells and whistles to add a proformance profile for their console games.

 

[Balducci30]

Do PC devs have to split their focus when they give you options to configure how a game runs on your system? There are of more pc configuration than console, and yet devs are able to accommodate those thousands of configurations. I have faith that most devs can turn off some bells and whistles to add a proformance profile for their console games.

That’s what I’m saying I believe they do split their focus - I believe the fact that they’re forced to accommodate for different configurations holds them back.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

That’s what I’m saying I believe they do split their focus - I believe the fact that they’re forced to accommodate for different configurations holds them back.

Well devs could just aim for 60 fps from the jump, then they wouldn't have to split their time.

 

[Balducci30]

Well devs could just aim for 60 fps from the jump, then they wouldn't have to split their time.

They could, but then we come back to the whole idea is that if you design for 30fps you have room to make a more ambitious game. Again - most games aren’t ambitious at all - visually or otherwise - but the ones that are, I don’t think should be mandated to hit 60 FPS. But we can agree to disagree here

 

[Rayderism]

To be fair, I understand the people who NEED 60fps or better to enjoy a game, I really do. 60+fps is always better than 30 or less, of course it is. Especially if you're sporting an OLED TV, those TV's are notorious for making low fps games look even more juddery than an LCD TV would, due to OLED's faster pixel response. And then there's those who are spoiled from gaming on high-end PC's where they always have high fps. Suddenly jumping from 60+fps to ~30fps can be jarring. Believe me, I get it.

I just consider myself lucky to be able to tolerate lower framerates without it affecting my enjoyment of a game. When a game offers me fidelity vs. performance, I'll almost always choose fidelity. I'd rather see all the graphical bells and whistles than have a higher framerate with backed-down graphics or resolution. It's just a personal choice. I guess I've become more of a graphics fanatic than a framerate guy.
Still, it's not absolute. Some games do require high frames for improved input response, whereas others don't matter, and in those cases where you need better input response, I'll choose performance mode. It's just that for me, I'll choose the former more than the latter. And the games I play most tend to not need fast input response, so I choose fidelity most of the time. It's truly a game-by-game basis.

My point is that we have respect that everyone is different, with different preferences and priorities for their games. Just play the way you want and don't overly concern yourself with people who may differ in their preferences. There's no sense arguing about it, as it generally won't change anyone's personal opinion of how they play their games. Besides, why create animosity towards fellow gamers by berating them for the way they play? I'm here to talk about my favorite hobby, not argue with people.

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

Wait, what? People ACTUALLY likes the slowdown???

when it's done well (hits at the right times, framerate drops enough to be noticeable but not too much like a slideshow) it's like unofficial slow motion.
e.g., you're beating a lot of ass, slowdown hits, and now you get a little extra time to watch all the carnage.

also sort of like when you're playing sports, and something important happens that really grabs all your attention and it feels like time slows down for a little bit.

slowdown when nothing's happening sucks.
slowdown in a menu is just pathetic.

 

[Games of Today]

The 30fps in TOTK I would say feels great due to the rather low input lag, but there are some games with a heavy post processing pipeline that make the 30fps experience feel genuinely awful for the end user. I don't like to critique Killzone 2 since it's one of my favorite shooters ever, but going from KZ2 to KZ3 felt like such an improvement due to lowered input lag which made the controls feel so much more responsive.

I think some the input lag in KZ2 was also part of the design. The guns would sway like crazy when turning, like they had weight to them.

By the time KZ3 came out people wanted more snappy controls.

Compare the way BF3's weapon's move and aim to BF4. It's a similar case.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I think some the input lag in KZ2 was also part of the design. The guns would sway like crazy when turning, like they had weight to them.

By the time KZ3 came out people wanted more snappy controls.

Compare the way BF3's weapon's move and aim to BF4. It's a similar case.

I disliked the controls in KZ3 compared to KZ2. Ragdoll animations seemed to not be as good either.

I liked the heavy weighty controls. It was different than most other shooters. It had a "carry the heavy equipment" feel to it.

 

[Xtib81]

I was fine with 30fps until I bought an Oled. Games have become almost unplayable on it. I dare anyone playing on an Oled say that 30fps plays just fine, I dare you.

 

[Muffdraul]

The vast majority of devs are always going to push new graphics tech as far as they can with 30fps as their baseline. Just accept it already ffs.

 

[Games of Today]

I disliked the controls in KZ3 compared to KZ2. Ragdoll animations seemed to not be as good either.

I liked the heavy weighty controls. It was different than most other shooters. It had a "carry the heavy equipment" feel to it.

Same I agree. KZ3 removed some of the charm to make it more playable for casual audiences.

The death animations for the Helghast in KZ2 are still unmatched.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

The vast majority of devs are always going to push new graphics tech as far as they can with 30fps as their baseline. Just accept it already ffs.

That hasn't been the case so far this gen. Why are you agisnt people having options on console?

 

[Koenigssee]

"Good enough is the enemy of humanity."

 

[pachura]

So why do 48fps movies look totally awful?

 

[Bojji]

So why do 48fps movies look totally awful?

High fps movies have soap opera effect. We are so used to 24fps movies that high framerate movies just feel "wrong" and "cheap".

But movies are no games, for gaming there are things like input lag and fast camera movements where higher fps is objectively better visualy and BETTER FOR GAMEPLAY.

 

[DeepEnigma]

So why do 48fps movies look totally awful?

High fps movies have soap opera effect. We are so used to 24fps movies that high framerate movies just feel "wrong" and "cheap".

This. We have been conditioned to 24fps for almost a century now, so anything more gives it those effects. And also, movie purists/critics snub their noses at it.

 

[Lucifers Beard]

I understand people getting frustrated however this quote sum up entirely my thoughts on the matter, because personally I have the "chance' to not be bothered at all by 30 fps and I clearly see the difference (and I don't play MP).
Good luck to 60fps folks.

Yeah, I’m in agreement with this.

If people are so upset about not having 60fps or performance modes on console, buy a PC where you don’t have that problem with expensive hardware, but the majority won’t do that because it’s too much money and they expect/demand better because of what was fed to them by marketers trying to sell devices in the first place.

You have a £450 console which is excellent value, the hardware has its limits though!

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

The vast majority of devs are always going to push new graphics tech as far as they can with 30fps as their baseline. Just accept it already ffs.

You can always scale down the game to meet the 60fps requirements, it is not the case that games are running 1080p30 and we don't have much more we can do to get performance UP, I understand that, in the case of Starfield, most likely the issue is the CPU, the gamelogic is too demanding, but again, you can scale down on that front too. The game had this target from the start, and that is their own decision.

 

[Dibils2k]

i played Miles Morales and Ratchet in 30fps RT modes, i played Horizon 5 and Horizon Forbidden West in quality mode... what you gonna do about it.

and i am gonna play FF16 in quality mode too!

to me 30fps is more than fine aslong as its stable, as OP kind of alludes to, i have played so many great games in past at 30fps it will never be a deal breaker.

 

[Cramoss]

You can always scale down the game to meet the 60fps requirements, it is not the case that games are running 1080p30 and we don't have much more we can do to get performance UP, I understand that, in the case of Starfield, most likely the issue is the CPU, the gamelogic is too demanding, but again, you can scale down on that front too. The game had this target from the start, and that is their own decision.

Scale the whole thing down because some tiny whiny minority of gamers in their forums/bubbles cry about it? I don't see it happening still in 10 years

 

[rodrigolfp]

So why do 48fps movies look totally awful?

They don't. Maybe for people that likes 30 fps on games too.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Scale the whole thing down because some tiny whiny minority of gamers in their forums/bubbles cry about it? I don't see it happening still in 10 years

Tiny whiny minority? Okay, every time you present the choice between performance and quality the majority chooses performance, most of us can't even differentiate the downgrade in the visuals, and I find cringe to advocate for 30fps in favor of gains in visuals when we are pretty much in diminish returns territory.

 

[R6Rider]

Cracks me up seeing people trying to compare movie framerates to games. In this case justifying 30fps because movies are 24fps standard.

So fucking clueless.

 

[Minsc]

Cracks me up seeing people trying to compare movie framerates to games. In this case justifying 30fps because movies are 24fps standard.

So fucking clueless.

When I see a movie or animated show on my TV, the movement does look blurry when things are panning really fast, but it still looks really smooth. When a game does it it looks choppy as hell, and I hate it, FFXVI being a prime example.

 

[Bry0]

On fixed hardware the target frame rate is a development and technical choice. It really falls into the realm of opinion and consumer consensus. If the market rejected 30fps to where it verifiably hurt sales then it would probably not be very common.

 

[R6Rider]

When I see a movie or animated show on my TV, the movement does look blurry when things are panning really fast, but it still looks really smooth. When a game does it it looks choppy as hell, and I hate it, FFXVI being a prime example.

The first thing I noticed in the FFXVI demo was the horrible motion blur. It's still really bad on performance mode, but far less so.