• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

HFW is proof that 30fps needs to die.

Crayon

Member
Oh yeah absolutely, but resolution and framerates are different things. I'm in the camp saying we could've capped resolutions at 1440p (instead of going for 4K when it's just going to hold us back for now) at then aimed for 60fps with really nice visuals rather than the inevitable situation we find ourselves in now where a lot of the games that are 4K60 (on console) are basically upscaled, slightly improved older games.

I suppose the counter is that "we haven't hit the true potential of these machines yet, it's all about those sexy SSDs, babyyyyyy" but I mean we're approaching 2 years in and there is very little to show for next-gen so far (that includes games released and games teased/revealed). If we're brutally honest, we've had Ratchet & Clank and that's about it... Summer Geoff Fest came and went (as did the Xbox showcase) and there was nothing remotely next-gen looking.

Maybe, if we said "OK 1440p, 30fps" there would be better visuals but................ honestly don't know where I'm going with this. Point is this newer generation hasn't given us much so far. Maybe it's more about the creativity/capability of the dev teams rather than raw power.

Hardly any real next gen games at all. Demons, ratchet, returnal, and flight sim. I feel like ps5 is just a really nice PS4 at this point. I wish things were more exciting, though. The games just take too fucking long to make.

Hopefully, when these consoles are becoming the low baseline in a few years, we'll see them being wrung out and I bet it will be impressive despite the old hardware. Some games will only run at 30fps. Just in time for pro consoles.
 

Reizo Ryuu

Member
The original Halo, GTA trilogy, GTA V, Resident Evil 4, Skyrim, Super Mario 64, ... shit Golden Eye ran at sub 15 fps in multiplayer back in the day. Every one of those games broke new ground.. had huge success and played pretty great. Every single on of thos games could have been made targeting 60.. with who knows the fuckton of sacrifices that each of them would have had. 60 fps GTA V on a XBOX 360.. sure.. enjoy your blurry mess with N64 levels of draw distance. Leave those decisions to the guys that are busting their asses making the best video game they can make...
This isn't really a good comparison, because you are ignoring hardware limitations of the past.
Pretty much every console before the current generation used gimped hardware, even the NES and SNES had games with massive slowdown, but then if you went to arcades, the same games looked and ran beautifully, because of much more powerful hardware.

Epic is famous for lobbying 512MB ram for the x360, so gears of war could run as well as it did, but even that wasn't enough for 60fps because the hardware simply wasn't very fast.
The last generation was infamous for having a very shitty cpu, so more and more 30fps titles were released, simply because devs didn't really have a choice; even DmC Devil May Cry ran at 30 fps on console, a series that historically always ran at 60.

The current generation is kinda unique in the sense that the hardware is much better than anything released before, relatively speaking, no gimped hardware this time.
Higher-than-30 fps on past consoles had much more of a potential impact on everything than is the case with modern cpus.
 

Mithos

Member
Just get a VRR monitor, you’ll be fine.
I guess, now is as good a time as any... (and sorry for making an offtopic question)

So what;
50" 1080p highrefreshrate, VRR display for ~€600 is there to take a look at?
50" 4K*, highrefreshrate, VRR display for ~€800* is there to take a look at?

Only asking for a 1080p variant because there is no way my PC hardware** are pushing 4K @ 120hz atm even when turning of v-sync and running G-Sync/VRR.

The closest to the 4K version I've seen is the LG OLED 48" C1 (€900), it migh be an option (unless they go out of stock soon and the C2 ups the price), but I've seen many complain on oled for some things specifically for gaming, that I'd need to look into if it bothers me too.

*if 4K it needs to be able to do 4K@120hz, and not touch a 1080p signal but to use 4 pixels on the 4K display for each 1pixel of the 1080p signal without adding processing/filters and whatnot (dunno if this has a specific name).

** PC;
Ryzen 7 3800X
16GB DDR4 3200mhz cl16
Nvidia 2060 Super.
 

TrueLegend

Member
I guess, now is as good a time as any... (and sorry for making an offtopic question)

So what;
50" 1080p highrefreshrate, VRR display for ~€600 is there to take a look at?
50" 4K*, highrefreshrate, VRR display for ~€800* is there to take a look at?

Only asking for a 1080p variant because there is no way my PC hardware** are pushing 4K @ 120hz atm even when turning of v-sync and running G-Sync/VRR.

The closest to the 4K version I've seen is the LG OLED 48" C1 (€900), it migh be an option (unless they go out of stock soon and the C2 ups the price), but I've seen many complain on oled for some things specifically for gaming, that I'd need to look into if it bothers me too.

*if 4K it needs to be able to do 4K@120hz, and not touch a 1080p signal but to use 4 pixels on the 4K display for each 1pixel of the 1080p signal without adding processing/filters and whatnot (dunno if this has a specific name).

** PC;
Ryzen 7 3800X
16GB DDR4 3200mhz cl16
Nvidia 2060 Super.
Get an OLED. I have rained on the parade of OLED boasters but not for the reasons they think. OLED are great for gaming due to low input lag but perfect black level come at a cost of perfect grey level. Better contrast at the cost of color accuracy. Just get a comprehensive understanding of what you are getting. Dont get 1080p one for sure.

With 2060 super
You get Better 4k60 with dlss than the ps5 version of God of War
Better than native 4k with control dlss although you will need vrr for dip into high fifties due to RT and dial setting to console versions but the end result is miles apart from console version. There is a texture bug in control DX12 though so you will need a fix.

4K60 for Shadow Of the Tomb Raider at balanced dlss on high setting with ultra texture, environment detail and 16x anisotropic filtering with few drop in crowded scenes which are extremely rare in game and which the vrr will easily cover.

2060s can do much better than PS5 because PS5 is an APU architecture. Every single game out there except exceptions like AC valhalla will run much better on your PC then on PS5 with PS5 settings.

Most great looking game come with DLSS and those that dont like Arkham Knight you can run at 4k ultra with all setting including Nvidia exclusive ones at native4K60.

I gave this example because they share all the variety of workloads. Control is the top dog game out there in terms of visuals to test the consoles and PC.

You can play RE2 and RE3 natively at 4K60 in DX11 versions. Same with Devil May Cry 5 at Ultra and VRR will cover you in cutscenes.
RDR2 has DLSS now and the 4K output will be great with it.

Because of this 4k push by TV most games now have resolution scalers which work great in 4k. Just turn them to 80% and 90% and you are good to go if they are unoptimized and VRR is like the cherry on top although you can use it as a crutch for very demanding games but you dont need to because most of them come with DLSS.

Do not waste all that on 1080p display. If you were heavily into first person competitive shooter than i would say get 1080p 144 hz with fast response time like 1ms display but those things are not available on such bigger displays. So get a 4K display. Also all my testing were on base 2060 with few drops in high fifties in CPU intensive scenes because I was testing on my pc that i use for office work which doesn't have good cpu, its basically 8th gen i3. Basically all this testing I did was for checking out the power of dlss so mainly the first act of games which are pretty heavy in pretty much every game but some exceptions should be taken into consideration that will make you drop your setting from ultra to high or medium especially on things like volumetric settings in some games at 4k which may get heavy during endgame. Play at high and avoid ultra and also console settings. God after 30fps I hate the bad anisotropic filtering setting of console and then motion blur, turn that nonsense off and crank AF and then you are good to go.

You dont have to worry about 120hz infact it will make your 60fps feel doubly smooth as at 120hz your input lag will be halved not to mention OLED have top tier low input lag. Also it will make you feel web browsing better. Just be aware that burn in even though with its low probability is a very real issue so you will have to take some precautions and put effort into maintenance.
 

A2una1

Member
I played Forbidden West in 30fps, because I couldn't stand the shimmering in 60fps. Played through the entire game with 30 fps, and it was no problem at all. The same with Spiderman bevor it got the 40fps patch. Sometimes I really want the eyecandy over the fluidity and sometimes I don't depending on the title....

Guys who demand one over the other should really widen their narrow view of the world. Be happy most titles can give you a choice how you want to enjoy the game, but stop dictate how othe people should or shouldn't enjoy their titles...


TrueLegend TrueLegend : There is no PS5 Version of God of War and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, these are PS4 Games in PS4 Pro mode with a patch to unlock the framerate...
 
Last edited:

TrueLegend

Member
I played Forbidden West in 30fps, because I couldn't stand the shimmering in 60fps. Played through the entire game with 30 fps, and it was no problem at all. The same with Spiderman bevor it got the 40fps patch. Sometimes I really want the eyecandy over the fluidity and sometimes I don't depending on the title....

Guys who demand one over the other should really widen their narrow view of the world. Be happy most titles can give you a choice how you want to enjoy the game, but stop dictate how othe people should or shouldn't enjoy their titles...
Some of you really need to read dudes. You are literally repeating my point. HFW now at 60fps is a better experience than 4K30 which wasnt the case at launch. It was as exactly as you described, shoddy poor implementation of performance mode. Now when we have a proper performance mode which shits all over the 30fps mode we should ponder the question should the development enforce crunch and release halfassed 60fps mode because for some marketing nonsense they have to focus on 4K30fps version or just stick to the 60fps version from start so that they dont have work overtime and we get better 60fps modes with very negligible compromises from 30fps mode and then we can get proper 30fps mode later for sake of preservation and fulfill fetish of 30fps visual fidelity pretender snobs.
 

TrueLegend

Member
I played Forbidden West in 30fps, because I couldn't stand the shimmering in 60fps. Played through the entire game with 30 fps, and it was no problem at all. The same with Spiderman bevor it got the 40fps patch. Sometimes I really want the eyecandy over the fluidity and sometimes I don't depending on the title....

Guys who demand one over the other should really widen their narrow view of the world. Be happy most titles can give you a choice how you want to enjoy the game, but stop dictate how othe people should or shouldn't enjoy their titles...


TrueLegend TrueLegend : There is no PS5 Version of God of War and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, these are PS4 Games in PS4 Pro mode with a patch to unlock the framerate...
Yes I know that, i did not meant they were native PS5 games.
 

A2una1

Member
Some of you really need to read dudes. You are literally repeating my point. HFW now at 60fps is a better experience than 4K30 which wasnt the case at launch. It was as exactly as you described, shoddy poor implementation of performance mode. Now when we have a proper performance mode which shits all over the 30fps mode we should ponder the question should the development enforce crunch and release halfassed 60fps mode because for some marketing nonsense they have to focus on 4K30fps version or just stick to the 60fps version from start so that they dont have work overtime and we get better 60fps modes with very negligible compromises from 30fps mode and then we can get proper 30fps mode later for sake of preservation and fulfill fetish of 30fps visual fidelity pretender snobs.

But there are games where you can see a difference... so if you wan't a clear answer broken down to a yes or a no. No you should not force every game to be 60 fps.
 

A2una1

Member
Some of you really need to read dudes. You are literally repeating my point. HFW now at 60fps is a better experience than 4K30 which wasnt the case at launch. It was as exactly as you described, shoddy poor implementation of performance mode. Now when we have a proper performance mode which shits all over the 30fps mode we should ponder the question should the development enforce crunch and release halfassed 60fps mode because for some marketing nonsense they have to focus on 4K30fps version or just stick to the 60fps version from start so that they dont have work overtime and we get better 60fps modes with very negligible compromises from 30fps mode and then we can get proper 30fps mode later for sake of preservation and fulfill fetish of 30fps visual fidelity pretender snobs.
Also lets just take forbidden west as example and say it just had the 60 fps mode at launch. You saying there would (or could) have been more resources just to develop the 60 fps mode and have it nicer looking on launch is a purely specualtive statement. In software development there is never enough time to polish your product enough on reaching release. The developer side always wants more time to fix things and the business side always wants to bring the product to the market asap. So releasing a product on day x is almost certainly every time a battle between business and development. I can imagine if the 30fps mode wasn't in there the resources wouldn't necessarily been allocated for 'making the 60fps look better' but for many other things there too.

They could have also said: "wait the 60fps mode looks a little bit shitty, let's skip it and concentrate on other bugs, since our PS4 Version has also just a 30fps target'..

The matter of the fact is: the 30fps mode was the go-to-mode at launch and for several months. The 60 fps mode took multiple iterations to get to the point we have now. The how, when or what should have been are all speculation of persons not having any kind of inseight in the release/bugfixing/development cycles of Guerilla...
 
Last edited:

TrueLegend

Member
They could have also said: "wait the 60fps mode looks a little bit shitty, let's skip it and concentrate on other bugs'.
Which they did with Watch Dogs Legion and which is exactly why I want the death of 30fps mode. Like I said you are making my arguments but you are just looking it at differently. You are just thinking "Look at that asshole, whats wrong with options" and the thing is its not sunshine and roses. There is always a fallback standard and I wanna put my hand around the 30fps mode and just kill it. I am willing to get my hands dirty for a glorious future of console games at launch. It needs to die atleast a short term death. A month later they can spring it up and all these 30fps is glorious people can worship their jesus, i don't have a problem with that.
 

A2una1

Member
Which they did with Watch Dogs Legion and which is exactly why I want the death of 30fps mode. Like I said you are making my arguments but you are just looking it at differently. You are just thinking "Look at that asshole, whats wrong with options" and the thing is its not sunshine and roses. There is always a fallback standard and I wanna put my hand around the 30fps mode and just kill it. I am willing to get my hands dirty for a glorious future of console games at launch. It needs to die atleast a short term death. A month later they can spring it up and all these 30fps is glorious people can worship their jesus, i don't have a problem with that.
:messenger_tears_of_joy: Yeah we certainly have different standpoints on this, wich is not a bad thing for the sake of conversation :messenger_winking:. But I don't think it will go away. Especially with the multiplatt/multigeneration environment we're living in right now. Just imagine 60fps on the base ps4 you would be in Switch handheld territory resolutionwise....
 

Ulysses 31

Member
The stutter in more at 24 than 30.
And good motion blur really helps. I just finished uc4 remaster 4k30 and it played excellent! I am sensitive a bit to oled stutter in movies but uncharted was fine! Played really nice too.
Next play through will be in 4k on pc at 120.
Don't people generally use low motion interpolation for movie watching on modern displays? HDTVtest says on some TVs it's always on in some way.
 
So I have been reading comments in the recent fromsoftware article of eurogamer digital foundry and some dumbass said that most people prefer quality over performance version to which my response was what a fucking deluded guy. If anything recent patch of HFW highlights that 30fps needs to go.

To please 1 percent of retards like some kind of minority that require protection, is an absurd take on the whole game development process and creates a myriad of issues of which graphical fidelity is the tip of the iceberg. The whole thing is that this fetish of multiple modes need to stop and developers should focus on one 60 fps mode from start for modern consoles. Later they can add 30,40fps mode if they want but focusing on 60fps from start gives us games like gears 5 which is setup from start for 60fps. No more cloths physics, flying character like bugs once you make 60fps baseline.

If Guerilla focused on 60fps mode from start HFW would have been a better release on technical standpoint. And then for these 1% retards for which I am of strong opinion that their wishes should not be entertained we can have 4k30 fps mode for sake of future preservation. But there is no point in affecting the present experience for future preservation. Also now that PS5 has VRR there is absolutely no need for 30fps to exist, 40fps should be new standard for 4k because nearly all 2.1 hdmi port display support 120hz output. TLDR: Fuck 30fps.
Sorry to break it to you, but you don't represent the majority of people.

Most people don't distinguish 30 fps from 60 fps on their TV's, so targeting 30 fps is fair on the dev side of things; and it'll continue to happen. I personally don't mind 30 fps on a plethora of games.

Just be glad that 60 fps is more readily available this gen no doubt because they have a bit more overhead and because OLED handles 30 fps motion badly. (which 1% of people own, but they represent a vocal minority of prosumers that sometimes don't understand the caveats of what they bought). VRR-ready gamers are also a minority. We'll be lucky if it represents 30% of households by the time this generation fizzles.
(...) if they want but focusing on 60fps from start gives us games like gears 5 which is setup from start for 60fps. No more cloths physics, flying character like bugs once you make 60fps baseline.

If Guerilla focused on 60fps mode from start HFW would have been a better release on technical standpoint.
Gears 5 first came out as a 30 fps Xbox One game. And both games we're talking about have 60 fps modes on current gen, what are you on about?

Gears 5 doesn't have a 30 fps mode and that makes it better? Less is more? Screw "quality-mode"?
If Guerilla focused on 60fps mode from start HFW would have been a better release on technical standpoint. And then for these 1% retards for which I am of strong opinion that their wishes should not be entertained we can have 4k30 fps mode for sake of future preservation. But there is no point in affecting the present experience for future preservation. Also now that PS5 has VRR there is absolutely no need for 30fps to exist, 40fps should be new standard for 4k because nearly all 2.1 hdmi port display support 120hz output. TLDR: Fuck 30fps.
They couldn't because of the PS4 version.
It's, I don't want to offend, but quite out there to blame PS4 for everything.

The fact that most of these current gen games have 60 fps modes can be attributed to the fact that they are/were cross platform with PS4. They were free to target 60 fps on the PS5 from the very beginning. They just didn't (preferably that is) because they wanted the graphical leap to be higher so they focused on quality mode.

OP mentions Gears 5 in the same breath as being 60 fps and well done because it was targeted, blablabla, I'm sure they couldn't because of the 30 fps Xbox One version?


Scapegoating shouldn't be done. The Touryst was a switch exclusive at launch and now is on PS5 running at 8K and 60 fps, how do we blame the shitty handheld for that? Should we blame the graphics instead? Let's nitpick.

In regards to Horizon Forbidden West, I don't wish it ran better at 60 fps, I wish it was a better game.
 
Last edited:

Hunnybun

Member
Oh yeah absolutely, but resolution and framerates are different things. I'm in the camp saying we could've capped resolutions at 1440p (instead of going for 4K when it's just going to hold us back for now) at then aimed for 60fps with really nice visuals rather than the inevitable situation we find ourselves in now where a lot of the games that are 4K60 (on console) are basically upscaled, slightly improved older games.

I suppose the counter is that "we haven't hit the true potential of these machines yet, it's all about those sexy SSDs, babyyyyyy" but I mean we're approaching 2 years in and there is very little to show for next-gen so far (that includes games released and games teased/revealed). If we're brutally honest, we've had Ratchet & Clank and that's about it... Summer Geoff Fest came and went (as did the Xbox showcase) and there was nothing remotely next-gen looking.

Maybe, if we said "OK 1440p, 30fps" there would be better visuals but................ honestly don't know where I'm going with this. Point is this newer generation hasn't given us much so far. Maybe it's more about the creativity/capability of the dev teams rather than raw power.

I think it's more about the (very annoying) fact that those next gen games haven't even been SHOWN yet.

Until they have it seems completely pointless to judge next gen graphics.

You're right, we've basically had one (ONE!) proper AAA next gen game by a top developer either shown or released, and it looked fantastic. I suppose you could also count the bit we've seen of Forza, and imo that was disappointing. But then they seem to be wasting resources on RT so what can you do.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Hfw is proof that 30fps is fine and saved the game. I finished it this way and it played fine.
Your post is ban worthy is so stupid.
I like graphics and 30fps is fine if it’s not this super laggy demons souls remake type
This, if anything HFW is proof of the opposite.
I mean I get it but I don't understand the need to have the option removed...
30fps doesn't hold back games, 60fps only would though 🤔
 

supernova8

Member
I suppose you could also count the bit we've seen of Forza, and imo that was disappointing. But then they seem to be wasting resources on RT so what can you do.
Finally someone else who thought Forza looked meh. It looked marginally better than GT7 and they want an extra 12 bloody months to release it. I was expecting much more considering how long they kept it under wraps.
 
Last edited:
Most people play stuff like Fortnite, Roblox, Minecraft etc. They all look like shit.
CoD and FIFA if I'm not mistaken have been 60fps on consoles for a long while as well. If anything it seems like truly popular games that are 30fps are the exception.
 
Last edited:
Finally someone else who thought Forza looked meh. It looked marginally better than GT7 and they want an extra 12 bloody months to release it. I was expecting much more considering how long they kept it under wraps.
A car is a car I suppose. GT7 doesn't look that much different from GT Sports, a PS4 game. And I think they'll keep the car detail crown as they spend more time per car and use more polygons. Turn 10 is not going to redo all their cars so they might get the lighting, reflection, day and night cycle and race track crowns.

If it avoids the microtransactions and has the same content Forza 6 did (Forza 7 backtracked a little, but nothing dealbreaking) it's fine and already a better product than it's competitor, in spite of car detail.

Forza 8 claims to have ray tracing during gameplay, that's something.
 
Last edited:

Hunnybun

Member
Finally someone else who thought Forza looked meh. It looked marginally better than GT7 and they want an extra 12 bloody months to release it. I was expecting much more considering how long they kept it under wraps.

Yeah I was pretty disappointed and I don't even have an Xbox lol.

I actually think GT7 looks better, overall. Not the environments, obviously, but the lighting does make it look pretty much photorealistic at times.

DF are giddy about it cos it uses RT at (presumably) 4K60, but that just means it's technically impressive, not that it actually LOOKS good. Some people seem to forget that that's the only thing that ACTUALLY matters.
 

Mithos

Member
WALL OF TEXT

I'm not really interested in running 4K@60 if I could run 1080p@120, I think chasing resolution by the developers when it comes to games is a bad idea, I mean IF games when upping the resolution had been Super Mario 64 -> Super Mario Odyssey, but its not, it's just just SM64 -> SM64 with higher resolution.

RE2 and RE3 remake, I'm (before rtx patch) running at 1080p output but 200% (4K) renderresolution at locked 60fps, so they do not require much, now the only reason for me running at 200% renderscale is tat when i run native 1080p the picture looks bad, as in dithering or colorbanding not sure how to describe it, but at 4K on a 1080p display it looks smoothed out and clean.

So if I'd get an LG OLED 4K TV id probably still run everything at 1080p, to get higher graphical settings and/or higher frame-rate then dropping the settings for 4K, unless ofc. the game is so easy to run that even at 4K you could run high/highest settings and still get high refresh-rate.

And while if you check my old post, you see me saying DLSS should be in ALL games, I kinda do not use it, because I'm only running 1080p (looks horrible in screenshots, and turning it on and off, on and off between playing or taking screenshots, meh to lazy, off it goes) so it's absolutely not as good as when you use it on 4K, and maybe even 1440p.

When it comes to things that might be bad with oled, I'm BAD at being gentle to my display, hell I had my current display (Sony KDL-50w805b) ON for about 4 months straight and no screensaver and I do not think there is any anti burning techniques on the TV either, BUT if there is and its turned on by default then that was ofc. used because I at least didn't turn anything off, and after thoose almost 4 months, no burn-in or image retention at all anywhere.

Edit:
Oh and I do not play anything FPS competitive or almost anything multiplayer at all to be honest (when I do it's in games whgere you can play solo). Why have someone else ruin or demand how you are supposed play a game?
 
Last edited:

Scotty W

Member
this thread is peak dystopia
it's information warfare from two sides of bored losers on the internet who cant bring any good into this world, with both sides prying at every crumb and firing misinformation bullets.
the fuck even did this to yall? go talk to real people. your families. your friends. your community.
go take a walk in a park. enjoy the nice summer weather.
 

Sosokrates

Member
I said yesterday that i think 60fps adds more to the experience then native 4k or better effects. However if you start at 30fps its good, its when you switch from 60 to 30 is when 30fps feels like a slideshow.

There are also games which do 30fps better in my opinion, TLOU2 + RDR2 dont feel as slideshowy, they feel pretty amooth at 30fps.
 

Traxtech

Member
30 fps isn't the end of the world, IF and only if they implement a proper form of quality motion blur as 30 fps with dog shit motion blur is extremely dog shit.

Especially on any OLED screen with its instant response time and sample and hold tech, it is extremely jarring.
 
Last edited:

Inviusx

Member
I'm with you OP, I'm never going back to 30fps.

If the back half of this generation delivers nothing but lame ass UE5 asset store games with barely stable 30fps caps I'm happy to just press pause on this hobby until the PS6 comes out.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
30fps is cool for marketing, as it allows them to show pretty graphics on the trailer while still having a mode to play the game at 60fps.

But yeah, imo almost no game should be played at anything lower than 60fps. Maybe JRPGS or slow turn-based strategy games could have a pass at 30fps.
These are some of the worst takes of all time. 30fps for many games is fine.
 
These are some of the worst takes of all time. 30fps for many games is fine.
Nah they are not fine for many games.

Racing, action, sports, fighting, RTS, FPS, platformer...All of those genres are better at 60fps. Yeah, 30fps might be playable and enjoyable, but the gameplay will be affected by it in a bad way.

Meanwhile 30fps doesn't affect the gameplay as much in turn based games of visual novels.
 

Gusy

Member
This isn't really a good comparison, because you are ignoring hardware limitations of the past.
Pretty much every console before the current generation used gimped hardware, even the NES and SNES had games with massive slowdown, but then if you went to arcades, the same games looked and ran beautifully, because of much more powerful hardware.

Epic is famous for lobbying 512MB ram for the x360, so gears of war could run as well as it did, but even that wasn't enough for 60fps because the hardware simply wasn't very fast.
The last generation was infamous for having a very shitty cpu, so more and more 30fps titles were released, simply because devs didn't really have a choice; even DmC Devil May Cry ran at 30 fps on console, a series that historically always ran at 60.

The current generation is kinda unique in the sense that the hardware is much better than anything released before, relatively speaking, no gimped hardware this time.
Higher-than-30 fps on past consoles had much more of a potential impact on everything than is the case with modern cpus.

What? The XBOX 360 was a really fast console for the time. The reason Gears of War didn't hit 60 fps on the X360 is beacause it ALSO LOOKED INSANE for the time. EPIC decided to go for incredible visuals rather than framerate, and guess what? People loved Gears because it played great and sold a fuckton of copies. Your NES / SNES comparisons with Arcade games of the time is very similar to comparing current gen consoles to Top of the line Gaming PC's. You are talking about a difference of 500$ hardware vs several thousand $ hardware.

Hardware limitations on home consoles have always existed and will continue to exists and are always relative to the ambitions of modern software. I agree that current gen consoles have a well balanced mix of GPU/CPU and that is great.. but that doesn't mean that it's a magic box that can brute force 60 fps everything you throw at it, devs will always have to make sacrifices somewhere to reach those framerates. EVERY SINGLE GAME EVER could have been made with a 60 fps target if enough concessions are made from the beginning. Think about it, modern software allow us to have raytracing global illumination, raytraced reflections, advanced physics, destructible environments, advance fluid physics, caustics, etc etc.. you could argue that if the PS5 doesn't allow me to have all that at the same time running at decent HD resolutions at 60 fps.. well.. the PS5 is also gimped hardware, isn't it?

We can all agree that HFW looks fucking AMAZING running at 60 fps. But if Guerrilla decided from the beginning to make it a 30 fps PS5 only game from the beginning, maybe we could've had every structure and tree on the game dynamic and destructible. Maybe we could've gotten raytraced global illumination which makes games look absolutely incredible (Play Metro Exodus). Maybe the draw distance could've been pushed even further and allowed the game to have an even more stable image. Maybe it would have allowed to have super epic combat encounters of a hundred watchers at the same time. All of that could've been scrapped so we could have our 60 fps mode... We'll never know.

I'm happy they chose whatever concessions they had to make to allow me to play the game at glorious 60fps. That doesn't mean I'm going to erase from existence all of the people that would've rather have advanced physics, raytraced global illumination and hordes of watchers with the game running at 30. THERE IS A PLACE AND A SPACE FOR EVERYTHING..
 
Last edited:

MastaKiiLA

Member
Some of you really need to read dudes. You are literally repeating my point. HFW now at 60fps is a better experience than 4K30 which wasnt the case at launch. It was as exactly as you described, shoddy poor implementation of performance mode. Now when we have a proper performance mode which shits all over the 30fps mode we should ponder the question should the development enforce crunch and release halfassed 60fps mode because for some marketing nonsense they have to focus on 4K30fps version or just stick to the 60fps version from start so that they dont have work overtime and we get better 60fps modes with very negligible compromises from 30fps mode and then we can get proper 30fps mode later for sake of preservation and fulfill fetish of 30fps visual fidelity pretender snobs.
Why don't you just buy a PC? If framerate is so important to you, why are you even bothering with consoles? Consoles have had most games under 60fps for almost 40 years now. This isn't some new anomaly. Even sprite games could drop frames. So buy a PC, and enjoy all your frames. Or maybe you're too broke to have such extravagant tastes, and shouldn't be so aggressive in condemning devs and gamers.
 

Reizo Ryuu

Member
What? The XBOX 360 was a really fast console for the time.
Hmm, not really, not relatively at least, the CPU was very quirky, so unless you were a beast programmer that knew how to optimise perfectly, each thread was the same as maybe a 1.2ghz p3; of course Epic have some really good programmers, so they managed to get the most out of gears of war, even though gears only uses 2 of the 3 cores of the x360 cpu.
The gpu had to deal with the unified 512mb pool of ram, but it did have that 10mb of eDRAM which was cool.
the reason Gears of War didn't hit 60 fps on the X360 is beacause it ALSO LOOKED INSANE for the time. EPIC decided to go for incredible visuals rather than framerate
No, the reason was the system being underpowered; if the ram wasn't upgraded to 512mb, it wouldn't even have run at 20fps.
Your NES / SNES comparisons with Arcade games of the time is very similar to comparing current gen consoles to Top of the line Gaming PC's. You are talking about a difference of 500$ hardware vs several thousand $ hardware.
That doesn't matter, the point is the arcade versions were the best and intended versions of the game and ran much better, the devs could've chose 20-30fps there as well, and push the "graphics" even more (they were already vastly more beautiful than the console releases), but they didn't, they chose 60fps mostly likely because their games just played much better like that.
I agree that current gen consoles have a well balanced mix of GPU/CPU and that is great.. but that doesn't mean that it's a magic box that can brute force 60 fps everything you throw at it, devs will always have to make sacrifices somewhere to reach those framerates.
well,...of course? PCs also aren't some "magic boxes" that run everything at ultimate settings always at 60+fps, nobody is saying that, that's not the point.
The point is that current consoles have hardware that is much faster than any previous console released, relatively.
The CPUs are actually fast this time, the GPUs are powerful, they have more ram than some people still have in their PCs...the gap between console/pc hardware needed to reach a good balance between visuals and 60 fps is many times smaller this generation; the developers actually have choices now that don't have to sacrifice as much as they used to with previous consoles, to hit that 60fps, whereas before sometimes they often had no choice.
you could argue that if the PS5 doesn't allow me to have all that at the same time running at decent HD resolutions at 60 fps.. well.. the PS5 is also gimped hardware, isn't it?
...no, now you're just being silly.
 

Blendernaut

Neo Member
WTF. HFW prooves that 30 fps mode still makes sense if you want the best graphic quality over performance. And IN FACT, almost every reviewer out there player in 30 fps because apparently the difference in quality is so obvious that it was worth it the decrease in performance.
And I myself chose 30fps mode when I played it. I agreed with the reviewers.
 

ChiefDada

Member
WTF. HFW prooves that 30 fps mode still makes sense if you want the best graphic quality over performance. And IN FACT, almost every reviewer out there player in 30 fps because apparently the difference in quality is so obvious that it was worth it the decrease in performance.
And I myself chose 30fps mode when I played it. I agreed with the reviewers.

This is no longer applicable after the 60fps patch fix. I recommend you check out the new performance mode when you get a chance.
 

Schorschi

Neo Member
So I have been reading comments in the recent fromsoftware article of eurogamer digital foundry and some dumbass said that most people prefer quality over performance version to which my response was what a fucking deluded guy. If anything recent patch of HFW highlights that 30fps needs to go.

To please 1 percent of retards like some kind of minority that require protection, is an absurd take on the whole game development process and creates a myriad of issues of which graphical fidelity is the tip of the iceberg. The whole thing is that this fetish of multiple modes need to stop and developers should focus on one 60 fps mode from start for modern consoles. Later they can add 30,40fps mode if they want but focusing on 60fps from start gives us games like gears 5 which is setup from start for 60fps. No more cloths physics, flying character like bugs once you make 60fps baseline.

If Guerilla focused on 60fps mode from start HFW would have been a better release on technical standpoint. And then for these 1% retards for which I am of strong opinion that their wishes should not be entertained we can have 4k30 fps mode for sake of future preservation. But there is no point in affecting the present experience for future preservation. Also now that PS5 has VRR there is absolutely no need for 30fps to exist, 40fps should be new standard for 4k because nearly all 2.1 hdmi port display support 120hz output. TLDR: Fuck 30fps.
Why so hart?
 

TrueLegend

Member
Why don't you just buy a PC? If framerate is so important to you, why are you even bothering with consoles? Consoles have had most games under 60fps for almost 40 years now. This isn't some new anomaly. Even sprite games could drop frames. So buy a PC, and enjoy all your frames. Or maybe you're too broke to have such extravagant tastes, and shouldn't be so aggressive in condemning devs and gamers.
Brother with all due respect how many times i have to reply to comment like yours....I have a PC dude. How the fuck am I supposed to play HFW on it.
 

supernova8

Member
A car is a car I suppose. GT7 doesn't look that much different from GT Sports, a PS4 game. And I think they'll keep the car detail crown as they spend more time per car and use more polygons. Turn 10 is not going to redo all their cars so they might get the lighting, reflection, day and night cycle and race track crowns.

If it avoids the microtransactions and has the same content Forza 6 did (Forza 7 backtracked a little, but nothing dealbreaking) it's fine and already a better product than it's competitor, in spite of car detail.

Forza 8 claims to have ray tracing during gameplay, that's something.

Everything I've seen of GT7 makes it obvious they built it on top of whatever engine they used to make GT Sport. To be fair GT Sport was a solid game (I'm not really into online but fair enough, it is/was obviously popular) so you could say "aint broke don't fix it". I would let them off with GT7 if they release an absolutely stunning GT8 in a few years time (presumably when the semiconductor shortages are over and the PS5 installed base is much bigger so that they can justify making it next-gen only) but I just don't see it happening.
 

Whitecrow

Gold Member
Thinking that smoothness is the only thing that matters in a game, and hence the benefits of extra bells and whistles are irrelevant, makes you literally a fkn egocentric asshat.

Your preferences are not everone elses preferences. And saying that things other people preffer should disappear makes you an egocentric asshat.
 
 
Top Bottom