• 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.

Quality and performance modes are annoying

Do you research graphics modes before playing?

  • Yes - DF, NXg etc

    Votes: 111 30.6%
  • No - I always put in Fidelity

    Votes: 56 15.4%
  • No - I always put in Performance mode

    Votes: 196 54.0%

  • Total voters
    363

rofif

Gold Member
S is ~720p! Yes I believe NXG because he can actually measure it from his tools. What your PS5 or TV tells you is just the output - and that means jack shit.
I am not an idiot. You think I am looking at output res wtf.
It should be dynamic 1440 he says. it sure as fuck don’t look like bare 1080. At least their aa is very good.
nx don’t have magic tools and you can’t pixel count with this modern temporar solutions so easy
 
Last edited:

8BiTw0LF

Gold Member
I am not an idiot. You think I am looking at output res wtf.
It should be dynamic 1440 he says. it sure as fuck don’t look like bare 1080. At least their aa is very good.
nx don’t have magic tools and you can’t pixel count with this modern temporar solutions so easy
Actually he does have "magic" tools. He developed them.

Eat the L my guy. 1080p on PS5 and XSX.
 
60 fps on console > ALL

144hz+ FTW on PC

I mean, yes and no. Display size matters. If you're playing on a large 4k display like an OLED and targeting 4k120hz, you're going to have to make some sacrifices here and there to get close to the dream. I prioritize staying close to 4k over higher settings, all other things being equal. Of course, not to the detriment of framerate fluctuating much below, say 90fps (where you can really start to tell the difference even with gsync) however. 144hz+ is fantastic and great for competitive games but I'm competitive as shit at a locked 117fps in games like Destiny and Halo on my CX + 3080 rig.
 

rofif

Gold Member
Actually he does have "magic" tools. He developed them.

Eat the L my guy. 1080p on PS5 and XSX.
He don’t. That’s not how it works… he is still looking at captured image. He is not running debug ps5.
but you are contradicting yourself. He praises how good it looks like 4k man
 
Last edited:

8BiTw0LF

Gold Member
He don’t. That’s not how it works… he is still looking at captured image. He is not running debug ps5.
but you are contradicting yourself. He praises how good it looks like 4k man
Because of the effects! He measures games for a living, so I'm sure he knows a hell lot more than you do.
 

rofif

Gold Member
Because of the effects! He measures games for a living, so I'm sure he knows a hell lot more than you do.
He doesn’t have some secret knowledge. It’s just tsr in ue5.
not sure he knows much more than me. It’s nothing complicated. I do like watching him a lot because of detailed analysis. Best in business. Always what I want to know.

Anyway. It’s all good mate :p
 
Last edited:
I always start with performance, but it gets weird in some games. Sometimes it's 60 vs 30, sometimes both 60 with decreased resolution, sometime 120 vs 60, etc.

If I do any research, it's always "which mode has the smoother frame rate." I don't fuck with 30.
 

Yoboman

Member
I feel you OP

In a way you are getting the best of both worlds in a choice of 60 fps or high resolution / enhanced

But it's also the worst of both worlds in 30 fps or lower resolution / effects

Also the reason I'm not big on PC gaming, because I always spend hours tinkering in the settings trying to find the best settings for my set up and never feel like I'm getting the best experience

Sometimes ignorance of a single optimised setting can be bliss.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Gold Member
I hope Matrix demo shows the glory of console graphics again when you go with 30fps.
It does! Motion blur is a bit too heavy but helps the 30fps to look better in the demo.
the controls are weird and laggy but it’s just a tech demo. Stunning graphics worth 30 fps
 

UltimaKilo

Gold Member
Makes current Gen feel like a gap generation. I always felt these consoles were half-baked, insofar that “pro” versions, where we might be able to have our cake and eat it too, is the real end-game for this gen. Especially when you think about VR.
 

Reallink

Member
He don’t. That’s not how it works… he is still looking at captured image. He is not running debug ps5.
but you are contradicting yourself. He praises how good it looks like 4k man

Regardless of the presence of any special tools, intuition alone should suggest that this is likely pushing things WAY beyond what a Series S should be able to render in native 1080p. What's more, the raw resolution toggle on PS5/SX certainly appears by eye to be much closer to 1080p than 1440p. Even with upsampling engaged they're a far cry from a subjective 4K/Faux-K.
 
Last edited:

ZywyPL

Gold Member
You people blindly accept any drawbacks the game has in order to reach 60 fps?

The Medium on XSX was the first game in 10+ years that I played at 30FPS , and it was quite easily the worst experience I ever had during that period (playing on OLED display makes it even worse mind you). Yesterday I tried out UE5 The Matrix demo, and I had the exact same, terrible experience, it doesn't even hold 30 to begin with.

So if that's what playing on consoles will be all about in upcoming years, I'll once again go back playing exclusively on PC. Because like it was said multiple times already, the initial impression from all the bells and whistles fades away really really quick, within 15-20min. or so, but then for the next 10-20h of tha game it's the framerate that brings the most significant impact.
 

rofif

Gold Member
The Medium on XSX was the first game in 10+ years that I played at 30FPS , and it was quite easily the worst experience I ever had during that period (playing on OLED display makes it even worse mind you). Yesterday I tried out UE5 The Matrix demo, and I had the exact same, terrible experience, it doesn't even hold 30 to begin with.

So if that's what playing on consoles will be all about in upcoming years, I'll once again go back playing exclusively on PC. Because like it was said multiple times already, the initial impression from all the bells and whistles fades away really really quick, within 15-20min. or so, but then for the next 10-20h of tha game it's the framerate that brings the most significant impact.
The medium is not a good example even at 30fps...
Bad performance, stutters, no motion blur.
But is should be a great 30fps experience because it's a slow game. They fkd up
 

ethomaz

Banned
The Medium on XSX was the first game in 10+ years that I played at 30FPS , and it was quite easily the worst experience I ever had during that period (playing on OLED display makes it even worse mind you). Yesterday I tried out UE5 The Matrix demo, and I had the exact same, terrible experience, it doesn't even hold 30 to begin with.

So if that's what playing on consoles will be all about in upcoming years, I'll once again go back playing exclusively on PC. Because like it was said multiple times already, the initial impression from all the bells and whistles fades away really really quick, within 15-20min. or so, but then for the next 10-20h of tha game it's the framerate that brings the most significant impact.
Try for an example Destiny.
Medium is not a example for anything.
Good 30fps implementation are well good.
 

mhirano

Member
Meh, 60 is overrated. It literally doesn't make a game any more enjoyable. The content is the content no matter how fast it's running.

Similarly, a good song listened to on cheap headphones is still a good song. Using expensive headphones isn't going to make the song suddenly completely different. It's still the same song. A crappy song isn't going to suddenly turn into a good song with expensive equipment either.
Sorry but you are (VERY) wrong!
Back in the day playing Bayonetta on 360 was amazing (60fps target) but on the PS3 it was BAD (sub30fps)
 

ethomaz

Banned
In action games, pretty badly
I don’t think so… experienced tons of good action 30fps games. Sorry if I take the games I played over a weird mindset in the internet.
Good 30fps is good no matter what you predetermined in your mind. And of course there are tons of examples of bad 30fps just like there are tons of bad 60fps.

Bad framerate can make a game bad.
30fps or 60fps alone not.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think so… experienced tons of good action 30fps games. Sorry if I take the games I played over a weird mindset in the internet.
Good 30fps is good no matter what you predetermined in your mind. And of course there are tons of examples of bad 30fps just like there are tons of bad 60fps.

Bad framerate can make a game bad.
30fps or 60fps alone not.
It's not as clear cut as what you make it out to be. 30fps can be tolerable/fine or even good for some people (like yourself) but for others it is completely unacceptable. No one is "wrong" but it's down to preference. However, it seems that more people now demand/prefer 60fps as evidenced by even the poll in this very thread. This is probably down to sheer availability of performance modes this gen and people are now much more exposed to it. The question is how developers will look at this changing landscape. Sure, pushing graphics at the expense of frame rate can improve marketability, but people are far more demanding of performance this gen. Offering two modes is the best compromise so far, and I think it will continue to be the norm all through the gen. Let's see.
 

ethomaz

Banned
It's not as clear cut as what you make it out to be. 30fps can be tolerable/fine or even good for some people (like yourself) but for others it is completely unacceptable. No one is "wrong" but it's down to preference. However, it seems that more people now demand/prefer 60fps as evidenced by even the poll in this very thread. This is probably down to sheer availability of performance modes this gen and people are now much more exposed to it. The question is how developers will look at this changing landscape. Sure, pushing graphics at the expense of frame rate can improve marketability, but people are far more demanding of performance this gen. Offering two modes is the best compromise so far, and I think it will continue to be the norm all through the gen. Let's see.
That is why I think the Matrix demo is so important for the industry.
 

rofif

Gold Member
It's not as clear cut as what you make it out to be. 30fps can be tolerable/fine or even good for some people (like yourself) but for others it is completely unacceptable. No one is "wrong" but it's down to preference. However, it seems that more people now demand/prefer 60fps as evidenced by even the poll in this very thread. This is probably down to sheer availability of performance modes this gen and people are now much more exposed to it. The question is how developers will look at this changing landscape. Sure, pushing graphics at the expense of frame rate can improve marketability, but people are far more demanding of performance this gen. Offering two modes is the best compromise so far, and I think it will continue to be the norm all through the gen. Let's see.
I used to be this way. Only 60 or more. 144hz screen, 240 etc. CRT displays, focus on fps, no blur and so on.
It was actually terrible playing 60hz limited game like dark souls123 on a 240hz monitor after playing other games at 240hz.... while previously, 60hz was great.... while previously 30fps was great.
The best thing I did was selling 240hz monitor and getting 4k 40-60hz vrr one. At least I got better visuals and never felt robbed of a performance with 60fps games :p (now 4k120 oled so best of all worlds?)

If a game is out on pc, I can put 3080 to work and get 4k120 and DLSS which is my dream come true. perfect iq.
But if I am to play, Uncharted 4 or the Last Guardian or Boodborne, 30fps is fine. Motion blur is fine. This is how these games are and I don't put one thought towards it.
If a new ports come out and I can play bloodborne 4k60?! F yeah, I am there day 1.
But if not? I think saying "I can never go back to 30, I can never play 30 fps game again, it's terrible" is just stubborn. People like this only limit their own enjoyment. Ignorance is bliss !!!
I am way less tolerant of imperfections on PC. I will do testing to get perfect image quality and framerate if I can. It can take a bit too much time. The pc ports usually also have more issues and troubleshooting... so sometimes I wish I just went with a console port.
Best pc surprise this year must've been Guardians of the Galaxy. Just works and looks great. Only had 1 carsh.

That said - I like good graphics. I am one of these people who always asked for photo mode :p So maybe that's my personal priority.
 

tygertrip

Member
"buddy", you have some problems...
I am gaming since 90s. This doesn't mean anything.
You clearly get way too worked up over this and have a huge issue accepting someone else's opinion...
Just leave with this attitude. This brings nothing to the discussion if you are just laughing at peoples opinion. I am trying hard to not get worked up by you... so I you can be happy for that.


This is not a topic of our discussion here. It's not about that at all...
The 90s? LMAO
 

K2D

Member
I'm ready for 40 fps vrr mode, with 48/60fps interpolated cgi for that cinema feeling, yeah..!
 

Barakov

Member
fat guy GIF
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Us console gamers will never get sliders like PC gamers that affect things bit by bit, but as long as one console option is 60 fps, I'm good. And by the looks of it, it seems just about every game released now has that. May not be a super stable 60 fps mode, but close enough.
 

rofif

Gold Member
Ok, little boy. Try not to get too worked up.
Stop making a fool of yourself and go talk to someone older if you really must.
I don’t even remember what this was about. Just that my age number is too small? 32 is apparently super young kid. My wife is probably a pedophile then :p
 

Raonak

Member
I'm glad we get the two options, because sometimes I want silky smooth 60FPS (demons)
other times I want that insanely crisp 4K IQ / RT (ratchet, horizon)

Being forced to go 60FPS in exchange for IQ in games where 30FPS works would be annoying af.
 
Last edited:

Gamerguy84

Member
I will typically prefer performance mode. No matter how good a game looks your not seeing all the detail while your playing.

But sometimes 30 is done so well its fine and preferable.
 
I think the options suck ass, i prefer my console games to have only one mode be it targeting high frame rate or fidelity depending of the game and that decision shouldn't be mine but the dev's who i would expect took performance into consideration when designing the gameplay.

I agree with you.

On PC, I want to play with the settings, try to customize to my rig, even use mods etc. But on console, one of the great advantages is suppose to be getting a streamlined experience, where the devs made exactly the best compromises for the game, based on its genre, style of gameplay, and the specific hardware of the console you're playing on. Indeed, I feel that's part of their vision and their job in this case, not to force the player to try and pick a compromise.
 
I guess the reason gamedev doesn't put a description is to mask some of the flaws of their option. Not everyone will agree with their setting.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
I voted yes but it depends on if it's a game I care about or if a game is McDonalds (default to performance for games I don't care too much about).
 

Tschumi

Member
Why? It's our fault. And those like us. A sizeable portion of us lay fucking eggs over frame rate, so the developers have to fucking gimp their graphics so all of these framerate twerps don't shit the bed, if people didn't have such a hard on for DF-style game evaluation without the logic, they wouldn't have to do this.
 
Last edited:
I wish devs would just fucking focus on getting a rock solid 60FPS.

There would be no need for quality and performance modes. Make your game buttery smooth to play and then see if you can slap on the eye candy.
Can you imagine sitting with a 20TF console and having to still endure 30FPS? Fucking hell.
 
Last edited:

Pagusas

Elden Member
I just wish all Devs would universally agree 60fps to be the standard. Drop 30fps completely.

if a performance mode is going to be added, it should just be locked 60 or unlocked VRR. That’s it.

if you can’t make your game look good at 60fps, you need to go back to the drawing board regarding the art design.
 

Boss Man

Member
“Research” is a strong word. I just google it to find out if performance gets me significantly closer to 60fps.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Gold Member
“Research” is a strong word. I just google it to find out if performance gets me significantly closer to 60fps.
That's too much and it's never a quick google.
You are ignorant to the whole issue presented here.
I don't want to set anything or as little as possible. I have a pc for that. And for me it's not always 60fps that I want. I don't want to feel like I am sacrificing image quality for 60fps or other way around.
Best to watch a DF/NX video or at least read an article.
Look at ghostwire tokyo?! 6 modes. Not a single one good. Then You factor vrr into it. Is it compativle, does it unlock fps cap, does it make your tv flicker...

Honestly, Uncharted 4 remaster does it pretty well as a game I am replaying right now but even here I spend my time switching and comparing which mode I prefer.
At least they have the modes labeled properly with 4k30, 1440p60 and so on descriptions. Which is great!
I ended up with Fidelity 4k30 mode. I find the game incredibly impressive graphically.
30fps mode have great controls and motion blur and it's unique how good this game feels at 30fps.
But I had to check it and compare... and watch df video because I don't want to miss out on something like "oh but performance mode is missing shadows".
I want the devs to focus on 1 single superior mode. And then add option to fully UNCAP fps for vrr users.

tl;dr - I am a graphics guy. I am impressed by graphics and it's what I remember games by fondly. I remember how awesome bloodborne is and how it looked. Not that it ran at 30fps... And I play on oled in my face so pixels matter now more than ever. ALL THAT AS LONG as it's good, responsive, stable 30.
But there are exceptions. Elden Ring with vrr is good in performance mode. Not too blurry. Demons souls also great in performance mode
 
Last edited:
two and a half months later and this is still one of the biggest non-issues i've seen people complaining about new consoles
For real, if you're that worried about it, leave it in the default mode as 9x out of 10 it's what the developer intended the game to look and play like.
 

rofif

Gold Member
For real, if you're that worried about it, leave it in the default mode as 9x out of 10 it's what the developer intended the game to look and play like.
Default mode? What is that.
It's not always developer intention.
There is a global setting in a console which determines for some games, which mode they default too
 
Top Bottom