Richard Leadbetter of Digital Foundry: Why the return of 30fps console games is inevitable

Thebonehead

Gold Member
There is nothing factual about it. It is fine if done well. I've finished horizon fw at 30 and it was ok.
Oh the horror. I can't see anything!


Seriously. I know 40fps and 60 is much better. Even horizon finally got performance mode patched and now it looks good, so 4k30 might not be worth it.
Btu still. Calling it horrible is just garbage opinion. We played games like that for years. All gears of war games, all uncharted games, tlou1,2... all the best games and it was fine.
Just because there is a ferrari out there, does not mean all other cars are undriveable.
Have some objectivism....
and I would still say the toxic bandwagoning is in effect and has blinded people to detriment of their own enjoyment and underestimating capability of their brains.... if they just are willing to try and have some fun.
Again... don't get me wrong. if there are no drawbacks, I am picking 40fps mode every time since why the fuck not... except these damn modes always drop after I finish the game. wtf sony

That's a 60 fps video
 

jufonuk

not tag worthy
Already here
Gay Bear GIF by Database數據
Valentines Day GIF by My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2
 

Saucy Papi

Member
Gross. Xbox Series XXX and PS5 Pro, hurry up. If not, I'll be ready with a 3080 to leave console gaming behind.
The problem is that if the issue is really related to draw calls which would point to an issue with the CPU, then you can't just stick a Zen 4 processor in and call it a day without breaking compatibility. The IPC's higher than in the previous family and you can't just downclock it to make sure jobs finish like they used to like they did with the Pro variants. Not unless Microsoft does substantial work with their APIs to update their abstraction layer and I believe Sony has minimal abstraction built into their APIs so they couldn't do that anyway. Of course, they could always clock the Pro variant's CPU higher and add more L3 cache to get around that limitation but I'm not sure that it would necessarily be enough to push all future titles to be a locked 60 fps.
 

DavidGzz

Gold Member
This is why we can't have nice things.
With this line of thinking and constant pursuit, there is no reason consoles can'r be 1000$ each year like smartphones. Then you are always behind and always lacking and it's all miserable.

Yes, I'd prefer that where we can trade in our previous console for the next one every two years for $200 extra. I just traded in my Pixel 6 for a 7 for better battery life and a better camera. I mean, we are pretty much getting that anyway of rumors are to be believed. Sorry I don't want to buy a new TV because every game is 30 frames per second again.
 

Rykan

Gold Member
This is why we can't have nice things.
With this line of thinking and constant pursuit, there is no reason consoles can'r be 1000$ each year like smartphones. Then you are always behind and always lacking and it's all miserable.
No. Because one device is a device that requires specific content to be built for it. The other is used for either hardware specific purposes or to play general/generic content. It's not remotely the same.
 

Salz01

Member
I don’t mind 30, if there is a 40s mode for 120hz tvs.

Also, its as if the world forgot that Ratchet and Clank PS5 exists. That game looks awesome, has raytracing, supports every single mode, Quality , performance , 40, etc…. hits close to 4K at least I think, and came out like two years ago now….. I’m not really worried about insomniac titles…
 

scydrex

Member
40fps is a noticeable difference over 30fps. It's not 60 but at 4K Resolution 40fps is an acceptable trade off on big AAA titles that shine in the graphics department. I hate 30fps, can't stand it but 40 was ok to get 4K.
Same for me. Tried Horizon 2 recently at 30fps and hell no... 75hr in with the 40fps mode it´s fine and looks the same as 30fps. Tried 60fps it´s smoother and still looks good but stayed at 40fps. To me 40fps feels closer to 60fps and noticeable better than 30fps. I hope that current gen only games that can´t run at 60fps then have 30fps and 40fps modes.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Member
Yes, I'd prefer that where we can trade in our previous console for the next one every two years for $200 extra. I just traded in my Pixel 6 for a 7 for better battery life and a better camera. I mean, we are pretty much getting that anyway of rumors are to be believed. Sorry I don't want to buy a new TV because every game is 30 frames per second again.
this is pure delusion. Thinking like that would destroy this industry.
Why you need to buy a new tv?
You have oled? Oled is fine with 30fps with good motion blur.. it's not ideal for 24fps slow panning shots. 30fps is not the same
 
what kind of nonsense is this shit?

Horizon Forbidden West looks VASTLY superior at 30. In fact, the performance mode looked so bad they got backlash for it, DF made an article about it, and blatantly said the fidelity mode was the way to play.

You’re just flat out lying to people, the game has a higher resolution, more effects and better overall fidelity in FIDELITY mode. How the hell does it look worse? Lmao :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Actually playing it feels horrible, the differencesin responsiveness were enough for me to never touch the 30fps mode, it was noticably bad and my eyes never could adjust to it. Whatever differences were there I could give two shits about.


There is nothing factual about it. It is fine if done well. I've finished horizon fw at 30 and it was ok.
Oh the horror. I can't see anything!


Seriously. I know 40fps and 60 is much better. Even horizon finally got performance mode patched and now it looks good, so 4k30 might not be worth it.
Btu still. Calling it horrible is just garbage opinion. We played games like that for years. All gears of war games, all uncharted games, tlou1,2... all the best games and it was fine.
Just because there is a ferrari out there, does not mean all other cars are undriveable.
Have some objectivism....
and I would still say the toxic bandwagoning is in effect and has blinded people to detriment of their own enjoyment and underestimating capability of their brains.... if they just are willing to try and have some fun.
Again... don't get me wrong. if there are no drawbacks, I am picking 40fps mode every time since why the fuck not... except these damn modes always drop after I finish the game. wtf sony
edit: btw this video appears to be from launch version. Game looks better now ! crazy

If the game feels like ass to play then I could give a damn about graphics. It's 30 fps mode was just bad and even on my Sony OLED I was perplexed by how anyone could prefer it when at times the game felt like slow motion
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
If the game feels like ass to play then I could give a damn about graphics. It's 30 fps mode was just bad and even on my Sony OLED I was perplexed by how anyone could prefer it when at times the game felt like slow motion
I played it at launch at 30 and was going back and forth. I was actually impressed how smooth it was for 30 compared to most open world games like RDR2, etc..

I opted for 60, but 30 was not "slow motion" or choppy at all in that game.
 

Thebonehead

Gold Member
This isn’t.


So damn choppy! Unplayable!

They said.

you’d be hard pressed to find a better looking game.

There isn't a great deal of camera movement in that, and that which is there is very slow throughout which is disguising things. Compare that to a bit where shes jumping around and you have to turn the camera fast it's a whole different ball game.

I will try and capture some 30fps vs 60fps tonight on the PS5 to demonstrate
 
Last edited:

rofif

Member
Actually playing it feels horrible, the differencesin responsiveness were enough for me to never touch the 30fps mode, it was noticably bad and my eyes never could adjust to it. Whatever differences were there I could give two shits about.




If the game feels like ass to play then I could give a damn about graphics. It's 30 fps mode was just bad and even on my Sony OLED I was perplexed by how anyone could prefer it when at times the game felt like slow motion
maybe you got something wrong set with your tv. Felt and looked good on lg c1.
Not the best motion blur out there though in this game.
 

proandrad

Member
There isn't a great deal of camera movement in that, and that which is there is very slow throughout which is disguising things. Compare that to a bit where shes jumping around and you have to turn the camera fast it's a whole different ball game.

I will try and capture some 30fps vs 60fps tonight on the PS5 to demonstrate
People love to show 30fps gameplay with as little camera movement as possible. Same trick game devs have used for years when showing a new game with slow panning camera.
 

8BiTw0LF

Gold Member
any excuse you need...
It's a graphics video. It's not supposed to twitch around like a crazy person
Animation films has better graphics - and you don't even have to move. I'm not impressed.

Returnal is still the best looking game.
 

rofif

Member
People love to show 30fps gameplay with as little camera movement as possible. Same trick game devs have used for years when showing a new game with slow panning camera.
It's shown with low movement speed because this is how you show stuff off. It's aesthetically more pleasing.
This was always the case. You make slow panning gentle movement to show off the graphics.
like here(using mouse but slowly panning):

That's why many games are shown off with controller. because you make it look better rather than jitter around. Controller gameplay looks more "cinematic".

You types always find one thing about the video that somehow discredits the whole thing.... for a reasons
 
Last edited:

PeteBull

Member
There is also the case of badly optimised games/bad ports, here no matter what hardware u got, it will run terrible, but what u gonna do, uncompetent/rushed/badly found dev studio or all those 3 combined factors and u cant expect anything decent to come out of it =/
 

Skifi28

Member
There is also the case of badly optimised games/bad ports, here no matter what hardware u got, it will run terrible, but what u gonna do, uncompetent/rushed/badly found dev studio or all those 3 combined factors and u cant expect anything decent to come out of it =/

The same thing happened with the matrix demo. Everyone was quick to announce it was the end of 60fps for consoles, but then it came to PC and you couldn't do 60fps there either so the narrative was dropped for a while. People are always fast to jump to conclusions based on 1-2 games that perform bad an all platforms.
 

BlackTron

Member
Of course 30 fps is going to become the norm for these current consoles and its the very reasons we need these pro consoles in our hands sooner rather than later

So base consoles will have spent more time as a PS4 Pro Plus/Xbox One Again than as a flagship for next-gen titles...this pattern that we're in is kinda shitty.
 

GloveSlap

Member
It's shown with low movement speed because this is how you show stuff off. It's aesthetically more pleasing.
This was always the case. You make slow panning gentle movement to show off the graphics.
like here(using mouse but slowly panning):

That's why many games are shown off with controller. because you make it look better rather than jitter around. Controller gameplay looks more "cinematic".

You types always find one thing about the video that somehow discredits the whole thing.... for a reasons
30 fps being garbage in motion isn't the "one thing", its everything. And if the video you posted is on par with a tech demo, being deliberately played slow....why did you post it to show how playable 30fps is?
 

rofif

Member
30 fps being garbage in motion isn't the "one thing", its everything. And if the video you posted is on par with a tech demo, being deliberately played slow....why did you post it to show how playable 30fps is?
search for fucking other videos and stop acting so high and mighty saying that 30fps is somehow unplayable now all of sudden.
This is how people loosing at arguments behave. They attach to some not important details and hold on to it. The slow panning is accidental., Go play unreal tournament or something
Wtf is going on. It's a random ass video that I didn't post. (although still proving the point that 30fps looks perfectly fine)
The video I posted contains plenty of combat and it looks great
 
Last edited:

PeteBull

Member
Sony can fuck off with the "pro" console shit. Bought the ps4 pro, but not buying a ps5 pro. Stupid as fuck. Two machines per cycle. Release OG with enough power.
i kept my og ps4, so this time around i kinda predicted pro version so not jumped on ps5, especially after we all found out its relatively small chip, so high probability of 2x bigger pro chip down the line, by the time pro console is avaiable im sure we will have more good games/exclusives too, literally no downside to get it if some1 has to chose between normal ps5 and much stronger pro version :>
 
I don't mind this as long as the pro consoles have a 60fps option.

I'd actually prefer this.

Give us both the fidelity and the performance. They should have launched pro versions at the start of the generation and should going forward with future generations.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
That's just not true though.

The Radeon 6900 came out right when the next gen consoles launched.

Will the PS5 Pro seriously outclass the 6900?

If it does, I'll agree with you and be pleasantly surprised.
That's a discreet card, not an APU. That card alone also costs more than those consoles, for just the GPU.

The Pro has a good chance of doing that, yes. If they do another butterfly design like they did with the PS4 Pro, or possibly chiplet like the 7 series is supposed to be.
 
Last edited:

Mobilemofo

Member
i kept my og ps4, so this time around i kinda predicted pro version so not jumped on ps5, especially after we all found out its relatively small chip, so high probability of 2x bigger pro chip down the line, by the time pro console is avaiable im sure we will have more good games/exclusives too, literally no downside to get it if some1 has to chose between normal ps5 and much stronger pro version :>
Fair enough. I just think, is this it now? Two consoles per gen? I mean, right off the bat, it's greed on a basic level. Should we all refrain from buying any new playstation and just wait for the inevitable "pro"? I can afford this shit, it's just I think it's a pisstake.
 

PeteBull

Member
Fair enough. I just think, is this it now? Two consoles per gen? I mean, right off the bat, it's greed on a basic level. Should we all refrain from buying any new playstation and just wait for the inevitable "pro"? I can afford this shit, it's just I think it's a pisstake.
i didnt feel like spending 500$ on ps5 then buying pro version for another 600-800bucks/euro down the line so my only option was to wait it out, ofc if u can afford it/want it then go for it, who i am to judge ppl buying habbits, games as a hobby is still relatively cheap vs most other hobbies;)
 

recursive

Member
They're amazing and are not that different from the 60fps modes. 40fps mode all the way for me, tbh.
It is more different from 60fps than 30fps. It is a nice option but providing a 60fps selection should be on the table. Really no reason why developers cannot.
 

proandrad

Member
It's shown with low movement speed because this is how you show stuff off. It's aesthetically more pleasing.
This was always the case. You make slow panning gentle movement to show off the graphics.
like here(using mouse but slowly panning):

That's why many games are shown off with controller. because you make it look better rather than jitter around. Controller gameplay looks more "cinematic".

You types always find one thing about the video that somehow discredits the whole thing.... for a reasons
I find it disingenuous in relationship with this topic because temporal resolution is a major part in the overall visual presentation of a game. Many people have bought into the groupthink that framerate is just about input latency, when in reality frame-rate effects how good a game looks as much as other effects. What has made of the conversation even worst is game devs labeling ingame modes as fidelty and performance, as if high frame-rates doesn’t affect a game’s fidelity.
 

Justin9mm

Member
Buy now.
GPU prices are actually reasonable, and all you are aiming for is 60fps so you dont even need to go too high.
12400F is like 150 dollars.

Cuz 30/40fps is here for "nextgen" consoles.
You mean 60fps @1080p with a budget PC like that.

I know PC is better but let's not pretend that 'current' gen consoles are so weak.

On console you are getting 40hz@4K with usually 60+ fps @1440p or higher. Lets not pretend that for the price of the console it's not worth it!
 
Last edited:

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
You mean 60fps @1080p with a budget PC like that.

I know PC is better but let's not pretend that 'current' gen consoles are so weak.

On console you are getting 40hz@4K with usually 60+ fps @1440p or higher. Lets not pretend that for the price of the console it's not worth it!
1080p@60?

Riiiggggghhhhhht.

I take it you assumed the 12400F was a weak CPU because its cheap?

 
Last edited:

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
I assumed if you are spending $150 on a CPU for a budget PC, you are not purchasing a 3080.
A 12400F matches a 126/127/129K within spitting distance like 99% of the time.
Why would I spend more on a pure gaming rig?

12400F - 150
B660M - 100
3080 - 3090 - 500 - 700
DDR4 - 50 tops
60fps 100% of the time - Priceless.

And then when the PS6 comes out, just replace the GPU.
Maybe get a 137K too.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
That's just not true though.

The Radeon 6900 came out right when the next gen consoles launched.

Will the PS5 Pro seriously outclass the 6900?

If it does, I'll agree with you and be pleasantly surprised.

Well, if we get the 6900 tech upfront, we have to pay 6900 prices for it and then some. I'd rather they wait a few years and get me that performance in a more efficient package.

@ Black_Stride Black_Stride what used up mining 3080 or 3090 did you find for $500 and $700 respectively?
 
Last edited:

Justin9mm

Member
A 12400F matches a 126/127/129K within spitting distance like 99% of the time.
Why would I spend more on a pure gaming rig?

12400F - 150
B660M - 100
3080 - 3090 - 500 - 700
DDR4 - 50 tops
60fps 100% of the time - Priceless.

And then when the PS6 comes out, just replace the GPU.
Maybe get a 137K too.
Ok.. Good Point.

I'm in Australia, the tax on our tech is outrageous, costs us $1300 AUD just for a 3080 alone lol
 
Well, if we get the 6900 tech upfront, we have to pay 6900 prices for it and then some. I'd rather they wait a few years and get me that performance in a more efficient package.

@ Black_Stride Black_Stride what used up mining 3080 or 3090 did you find for $500 and $700 respectively?

I mean waiting just means that you're not getting those experiences for a few years and instead getting worse experiences.

Imagine that the PS5 Pro comes out 3-4 years after launch and still ends up costing 700 dollars compared to the PS5 Pro at launch costing 1200.

So you're savings end up being 500 dollars over 3-4 years.

That's at most 166 dollars per year and if 4 years 125 dollars per year.

You wouldn't pay 125 dollars per year for better experiences for 3-4 years?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
I mean waiting just means that you're not getting those experiences for a few years and instead getting worse experiences.

Imagine that the PS5 Pro comes out 3-4 years after launch and still ends up costing 700 dollars compared to the PS5 Pro at launch costing 1200.

So you're savings end up being 500 dollars over 3-4 years.

That's at most 166 dollars per year and if 4 years 125 dollars per year.

You wouldn't pay 125 dollars per year for better experiences for 3-4 years?

It doesn't really work like that though. In the case of the current consoles, the 6900 equivalent we get in a few years time (likely something similar to a 7700XT) will have better RT performance and fit in a much more compact package than a 6900 at launch. Plus, $1200 would likely be a stretch with the power requirements and cooling that would be needed.
 
Top Bottom