sendit
Member
Games are no longer fun at 30 FPS.
Last edited:
Is 60 FPS killing overall graphical fidelity?
- Thread starter TaiLopezFan
- Start date
- Opinion
Games are no longer fun at 30 FPS.
Whitecrow
Banned
How hard are you trying to convince yourself?
Whatever, I dont know if you already did, but in case you didnt, you should acknowledge that the issue is with you, and not the games.
And that goes for all the irational haters.
You got that right! The 30 fps mode in DS feels like playing through molasses . I'm guessing they just slapped that mode in there for the hell of it and called it a day.
YOU PC BRO?!
Gold Member
For my part. Since switching to OLED a few years back 30fps just doesn't cut it anymore. This isn't true for all games but for some it's almost like playing a game in stop motion. Strangely games like Forza Horizon 5 still play great at 30fps. I guess it depends on frame times, motion blur implementation etc. I have to admit though, I do die a little inside at the loss of fidelity when I move from 30fps to 60fps in games.
Overall I'm honestly just disappointed in both Sony and Microsoft. For different reasons...
Microsoft just isn't pushing devs hard enough to take advantage of the various technologies the Series consoles are capable of i.e. SFS, VRS2.0, Mesh shaders, DirectML and much more. What's the point in investing in these things if they aren't being utilised? Microsoft should have had their own version of DLSS up and running a long time ago; especially considering the Series consoles support INT4/INT8. X/S native games should have to implement certain features to be considered 'next gen'. Encouraging developers to keep doing things the same way and producing these higher resolution, 60fps, utterly indistinguishable cross-gen games is a joke. It simply makes us question the investment in our new devices. I expect better.
Sony have more of an edge to them. I kinda like it. They just do there thing regardless of who it pisses of. With that being said they have been super anti consumer with some of their more outlandish decisions i.e. $70 games, cross-platform stance, paid upgrades for PS4 => PS5, woke crap, missing features like VRS, better back-compat library and so much more. It really feels these days like Sony is just trying to squeeze customers for as much money as they can get. I expect better.
Overall I'm honestly just disappointed in both Sony and Microsoft. For different reasons...
Microsoft just isn't pushing devs hard enough to take advantage of the various technologies the Series consoles are capable of i.e. SFS, VRS2.0, Mesh shaders, DirectML and much more. What's the point in investing in these things if they aren't being utilised? Microsoft should have had their own version of DLSS up and running a long time ago; especially considering the Series consoles support INT4/INT8. X/S native games should have to implement certain features to be considered 'next gen'. Encouraging developers to keep doing things the same way and producing these higher resolution, 60fps, utterly indistinguishable cross-gen games is a joke. It simply makes us question the investment in our new devices. I expect better.
Sony have more of an edge to them. I kinda like it. They just do there thing regardless of who it pisses of. With that being said they have been super anti consumer with some of their more outlandish decisions i.e. $70 games, cross-platform stance, paid upgrades for PS4 => PS5, woke crap, missing features like VRS, better back-compat library and so much more. It really feels these days like Sony is just trying to squeeze customers for as much money as they can get. I expect better.
Ramzy
Member
I had the exact opposite experience. I've got 250~ hours in Forza on PC and every now and then i try to play it on my Xbox One X connected to my 80" Sony Bravia, since i have no interest in getting a Series X at this point.
Dropping from 100+ FPS on PC to 30 FPS on Xbox massively impacts the game for me and making everything more difficult. Cars feel floaty, steering inputs feel delayed, and i just can't achieve the same lap times on Xbox as i can on PC.
Agree with everything else you said though. I sincerely do not care for graphics if it means dropping to 30FPS. 60FPS should be the defacto standard, minimum, requirement, base performance that games should offer moving forward. 30FPS is just not good enough anymore and it's a meme that we're still getting modern games on PS5 and Series X running at sub-60FPS.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
I don't know you but I'm having plenty of fun.
sendit
Member
Last edited:
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
It's not as much the 30 fps as it is the 30 fps + frame pacing
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
We're not really getting 30 fps though. Every game now has a 60 fps mode but they give you a 30 fps option for better visuals. So it's not really the consoles fault there.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
"They're just not doing enough this gen" explains how i feel too from both companies. The bar is lower for what to expect in terms of ambition and my theory is its because games are selling so damn well Sony and MS feel like they don't need to push harder.
Another area is backwards compatibility and next gen patches. It's time for consoles to catch up to PC in this area and if Sony and MS demanded that 3rd parties patched games for 60 fps (plus other enhancements), let's say any game released in the past 5 years, we could be playing so many more games like say Dishonored 2, rdr2, and Mafia 1 Remake at a level consistent with the generation we are currently on. Is it too much to ask to be able to play a game like rdr2 at 60 fps on a ps5? I don't think so. But without the platform holders making sure games are brought up to spec by 3rd parties (they could mandate it or they could incentives them somehow) it will never happen.
Why rock the boat though when console gamers won't even push for more ourselves though right?
assurdum
Banned
I have to ask: what do you think will happen when MS will start to use such tech? (let's ignore the part where they already started from awhile). 60 FPS as standard on XSX?
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
60 fps for the win.
30 fps is doable is it's a slow paced or turn based game. Anything that doesnt require pinpoint accuracy, reflexes or panning the camera a lot.
But given the option of 60 fps at a bit worse res or texture quality, I'll take 60 fps.
Some of the settings are ridiculous on console. Some games will have 60 fps performance mode and 30 fps quality mode and the quality mode's details are barely better. But it's at half the frames. Not worth the eye candy trade off.
Regardless of texture and RT quality, have fun trying to play sports, shooters, racing games or twitchy action games at 30 fps (more like up to 30 since there will be hiccups here and there to the 20s).
30 fps is doable is it's a slow paced or turn based game. Anything that doesnt require pinpoint accuracy, reflexes or panning the camera a lot.
But given the option of 60 fps at a bit worse res or texture quality, I'll take 60 fps.
Some of the settings are ridiculous on console. Some games will have 60 fps performance mode and 30 fps quality mode and the quality mode's details are barely better. But it's at half the frames. Not worth the eye candy trade off.
Regardless of texture and RT quality, have fun trying to play sports, shooters, racing games or twitchy action games at 30 fps (more like up to 30 since there will be hiccups here and there to the 20s).
grfunkulus
Banned
Casuals don't know the terminology but they know the feeling. Imagine if Smash Bros on GameCube played at 30fps. You think it would still be played today?
Whitecrow
Banned
Factual data? Hahahah ok dude whatever floats your boat
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Hell to the no. Numerous 60fps games look excellent on Series X. Forza Horizon 5, Halo Infinite, Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order, Cyberpunk 2077, and so many others.
Dust-by-Monday
Member
Really? You have your console set to 1080p? That's weird.
fart town usa
Banned
Yea, it's tough. It doesn't bother me on the PS3, PS4, etc. But 30fps on PS5 is laughable. It's so jarring. I don't know if it's lack of optimization or whatever but I'll take 60fps all day with lower resolution. Consoles should just focus on locked 60fps (at a minimum) and allow the option for 30fps or 60+. I mean, that's in place right now, and it should be the standard throughout this generation.
PC can have the 60+ and high resolution. They invest in the cost/effort and deserve as much.
assurdum
Banned
Because we were more used to 30 FPS in the past generation. Now we have played too much at 60 FPS in new consoles. Will be really tough when engines with the UE5 graphic fidelity will be the normality. 30 FPS will be inevitable.
fart town usa
Banned
I dunno dude. I used to say the same, "Who cares about 60fps, 30 is fine for me..." It still is when it comes to PS4, PS3, etc. but not for PS5.
Ghostwire at 30fps is pretty awful, Demon's Souls, and CP2077 too. It's a night and day difference compared to their 60fps versions. The boost in visuals at 30fps is fine if you're standing still but the moment you start moving you feel like you're playing a game at a level that the console simply can't handle.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
It's all about expectations IMO.
During the 360/PS3 era, most games were 30 (tops). The only key games at 60 were COD, most sports games, Forza/GT, fighters. If you didn't play these kinds of games, you had nothing to go on except 30 fps.
Expectations are higher now. So 60 fps is basically the norm now. More games became 60 during last gen, but now just about all games seem 60 fps (or at least have an option for 60). I dont think there are too many 30 fps only games. So with everyone now exposed to 60 fps, the console populace now sees how good it plays across all games so they prefer it as a priority focus.
fart town usa
Banned
I get that too but I'm brand new to 60fps. I can still go back and play 30fps (or lower) on older consoles and it's completely fine. I still retro game as much as I play PS5 games.
I do plan on putting some time into Ghostwire and Demon's Souls in 30fps to see if my eyes adjust. The fidelity is great, makes it look super cinematic but man, the games feel so rough, lol.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I said this many times. Anyone who thought Fallout 4 and Skyrim were sloggy shit, try it again on a next gen system at 4k/60 fps. Not saying you'll like the quests or 100th cave, but the gameplay at 60 fps is like night and day. Doesn't even feel like a Bethesda console game playing like this as their games (aside from maybe Doom), have always been 30 fps on console. Youd think the RPGs were made by another company.
Putonahappyface
Gold Member
I like 60fps since I've had a nibble from the forbidden fruit, but I'll stick to 30fps if my beautiful eye candy is compromised. 30fps genuinely doesn't bother me as long as the game doesn't have pacing issues. I wish developers would just make a game look as best as possible without multiple options, as it's beginning to annoy me especially after Ghostwire Tokyo.
Last edited:
sendit
Member
You're telling me
- less input lag/reduced latency
- overall smoothness of gameplay
Last edited:
YOU PC BRO?!
Gold Member
Yeah, I think you have it. For a long time I believed that the devs should decide what frame rate to target i.e. 30fps/60fps. I have reconsidered my opinion and now believe Microsoft/Sony should mandate certain technical standards as platform holders. Standards that are to the overall benefit of us the consumer. Being cool and letting everyone do whatever they like is fine so long as it doesn't foster practices that are to the detriment of the platform and thusly negatively affect the user experience. 30fps fits that criteria.
YOU PC BRO?!
Gold Member
Your thoughts on back compatibility and next-gen patches are right on target. I completely agree. Both companies have made this far more difficult than it needs to be. This sounds totally backwards but games should be built and the game program files structured with future backwards compatibility in mind. The game engines should be completely dynamic and controlled by the equivalent of a .ini like on PC (maybe Xbox does something like this already with their virtualised approach). Better yet, force the integration and adoption of a new API within the engine itself that feeds these settings. Then it could be modified easily when more powerful hardware is released. Your point regarding platform holders forcing devs to release updates for old games is exactly my thinking as well. There's just no reason to let these huge libraries of games fall away and die when just a little foresight and effort could have had them all looking great and playable for years to come.
Here's another thing that always got to me. Why are Microsoft/Sony letting devs push these huge game patches out that are basically the entire game? The only changes that should be included in a patch are the files that have been modified. There's no need to include the whole package. Why do the textures, sound files, animation data etc all have to be included in order to make a simple bug fix? Sony and Microsoft should clamp down on that kind of nonsense and ensure the tools are there to perform this easily. Not meaning to pick on Microsoft but as the creators of Visual Studio it is just inexcusable. It just got silly with COD and its 100+ GB patches. End of rant, haha.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
It's an overrated issue in bb. The game has one of fastest response times for 30 fps game.
Edit: this thread hot takes are super annoying to me. People discovered pcs and 60 fps and now they are acting like if it was not a thing for past 25 years or more.
I was gaming on 120hz crt 20 years ago…. Gaming is not about that. You are not elite because you can differentiate 60fps. You are lame for discrediting everything under some artificial line and not respecting other people opinions.
Last edited:
Hoddi
Member
I'm in the same boat. I bought my first 120hz PC LCD ten years ago and I'm still a CRT and plasma die-hard from before that. Adjusting to 30fps still only takes me like 10 minutes.
I also read somewhere that adaptation was an evolutionary trait and if you can't adapt to 30fps then it just means your bloodline is weak.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Bigger storage space allowed devs to eat up space with out giving a shit. Give em a inch and they'll take a mile.
When that Dead Rising game came out for Xbox One, it's first patch was something like 10 gbs alone. Who knows what the fuck was in it. Those launch systems had 500 gb of HDD, so who cares about unleashing a 10 gb patch.
When I had a 20gb Xbox 360, it was able to store:
- All OS updates
- All XBLA and XBLIG downloads
- All game patches
- All DLC/map packs
And I still had space.
Last edited:
Kazekage1981
Member
why do games always have to be 60fps or 30fps? Why not a stable and consistent:
40 fps
45 fps
50 fps
52 fps
55 fps
if a game targets 30fps, then it can dip below 30 fps-which to me is an absolute sin and abomination. Motion, responsiveness and fluidity to me is more important. Consistent and stable 40-55fps is a reasonable compromise.
40 fps
45 fps
50 fps
52 fps
55 fps
if a game targets 30fps, then it can dip below 30 fps-which to me is an absolute sin and abomination. Motion, responsiveness and fluidity to me is more important. Consistent and stable 40-55fps is a reasonable compromise.
Last edited:
nominedomine
Banned
They need to match the TV refresh rate, devs can't just assume everyone had a VRR display.
Locked 40fps works if the person has a 120hz TV, but then you fall into the same problem as VRR where devs can't assume people will have that.
To me locked 30fps is way better than unlocked 40~50 fps in a screen that can't handle that properly (without VRR/FreeSync). Some devs do that and I just can't understand why.
Last edited:
Kazekage1981
Member
I mean in TV's that don't have VRR, why not develop a game that targets LOCKED 40fps or LOCKED 50fps. Why do developers always target LOCKED 30fps or 60fps?
nominedomine
Banned
Locked 40 or 50 in a 60hz screen is just not ideal, there is no way to properly divide the frames. That's why they targeted 30 for so long, it was either 30 or 60.
What Insomniac is doing with their games really show how much better things can get when we move on from those limitations imposed by 60hz TVs. On 120hz TV you can lock the game to 40fps, with VRR you can unlock that same mode so that if the hardware can push it you'll get more frames, same thing for games that used to be locked at 60fps.
Last edited:
yamaci17
Gold Member
actually most tvs should be able to do 50 hz. . i remember my cpu struggling to achieve a consistent 60 fps in ac odyssey. i found solace in 50 fps / 50 hz lock back then and it worked wonders.
but i never see any game providing a 50 fps/50 hz mode
Kiya's Guard
Member
60fps may be killing fidelity, but 30fps (and 95% of the times even less) kills my fucking eyes and brain
Fbh
Gold Member
Most TV's are 60hz.
Meaning that they refresh 60 times in a second.
When a game runs below the native refresh rate (60fps) you'll ideally want a framerate that divides the refresh rate evenly.
If your game has runs at 60fps your TV will show you each frame once so the frames will be shown like: 1,2,3,4, etc
If your game runs at 30fps (assuming it has correct frame pacing) that's exactly half of the refresh rate so it can be divided evenly by showing you each frame twice. So the frames will be : 1,1,2,2,3,3, etc.
If your game runs at 40fps or some other frame rate that doesn't divide evenly you'll get something like: 1,1,2,3,3,4,5,5. The result is that since the frames aren't shown evenly you'll get a less smooth juddery image.
Last edited:
Kazekage1981
Member
Fbh
Gold Member
40fps should look fine on a 120hz TV even without VRR because, just like 30fps on a 60hz TV, it divides evenly.
Though honestly if you are already getting a 120hz display I'd say spend the extra cash and get one with VRR
If you want 50fps or any sort of non "round number" (42fps, 38fps, 54fps) to look good you'll need VRR. Which essentially means the TV isn't locked to 60 or 120hz and can adapt to other refresh rates on the fly. So the game can be like "hey I'm sending you 48 frames now" and your TV will be able to adjust.
yamaci17
Gold Member
i agree
and point i'd like to add that no one should get a 60 hz screen at this point. 40/120 is too good to pass up
most people called me when mad when i said them 120/144 hz allows non problematic usage of 40/48 fps back in 2019. most of them still think that 120 hz screens are not worth it if you re not going to push 120 fps on them. even that became a moot point since ps5 /xbox now have tons of 120 fps games
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
no. running 60fps is so easy. if a game struggles to hit 60fps then the developers don't know wtf they are doing. a well made game should be able to hit 60fps. as for frame rate itself no it doesnt affect visuals. it improves it.
64gigabyteram
Reverse groomer.
Actually, if that were the case i wouldn't buy it cuz it's a PS5 exclusive.
I don't own a PS5.
64gigabyteram
Reverse groomer.
i think 1440p looks soft too, but the difference between it and 1080p is that 1080p looks like fucking watercolors while 1440p looks like a regular image. 4k is crisp but you mainly want it for videos and movies and not games
StateofMajora
Banned
Playing last night, I saw that spyro Ue4 remake has an option for 40 and 50 fps lock.
I realized last night though the 120fps mode is broken, it breaks the mechanics and animation/controls hilariously. Sometimes I have to SETTLE for 60fps for reasons like this.
And here we have casual central still fine with 30fps and honestly I resent that a bit lol.
If console games had 120fps modes as standard, and 60fps was the minimum, it would be fantastic for PC gamers because then we could ensure that 120fps is properly supported. We need to move on to 120fps as fast as possible and all these 30/40fps console modes are holding gaming back.
Edit : just to clarify I am OK with 30fps retro console games (even 20fps n64 games on crt), if there's no other option, but there was a reason for 30fps games in the past. With ps5 hardware, there is no damn good reason for it. Even 40fps is a not too useful half measure.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
4K makes way more of a difference in games than movies