Gavin Stevens
Formerly 'o'dium'
You’re talking to the wrong person champ. Believe me.
-
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.
Xbox head Phil Spencer prefers higher frame rates than resolution.
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
- Game Dev Platform
You’re talking to the wrong person champ. Believe me.
CeeJay
Member
Is that not something to do with making it easier to determine the hitboxes rather than framerates? I understand that they turn down the foliage and smoke effects to make other players easier to see as well.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
I agree with Phil Spencer.
Don't expect me to wear the election button or anything, though.
Don't expect me to wear the election button or anything, though.
SleepDoctor
Banned
Setting up the "excuse" for why our "8k" console wont hit 8k.... or at least barely hit it.
HaveButOneLife
Banned
Microsoft has been flip flopping hard this generation, this time they go from damage controlling X1's lack of native 1080p games, to boasting about 4k resolution despite the fact that most X1X games don't run natively, to now being all about frame rate.
It's a respectable decision though don't get me wrong, all of the big 3 have flip flopped in this generation one way or another.
It's a respectable decision though don't get me wrong, all of the big 3 have flip flopped in this generation one way or another.
WouldYouKindly
Banned
How does that make any sense whatsoever? The One X blows the “Pro” out of the water
Hes saying Because the x has better graphics but the pro has better framerates its actually quite simple like what?
WouldYouKindly
Banned
**Waits for someone to complain about his comment**
Edit: Already beaten LMAO so predictable!!
Just like your lord and saviour phill "good guy" Spencer
alabtrosMyster
Banned
more like 720 to 900p on the Xsad machine, it will not get any better, this machine has bottlenecks up the wazoo.
Journey
Banned
Dee Dah Dave
Member
Well yes, they are one of the worst offenders. For me a 30fps game shouldn’t even qualify in any kind of ‘best graphics’ or ‘technical achievement’ category. It’s like gimping the game to make it look good and it needs to end!
Thaedolus
Gold Member
Yeah, it’s inherently subjective and bigger displays or sitting closer will make the resolution more apparent, but when I’m thinking bang for my buck on a display for gaming it’s always going to be stuff like response time, variable refresh rate (gsync preferred) and other factors like an IPS over TN. Resolution is probably the least important factor (though admittedly still a factor, sure) for me because I feel like I can just adjust to whatever it is and get used to it. 60FPS 16 bit games still feel good to play on an old CRT because they’re incredibly snappy and responsive, regardless of the 480i display. Sub 30FPS just feels worse to me and always feels sluggish in comparison. For my own tastes, I’ll always adjust PC settings to hit a rock solid 60FPS over maximizing other options
Gavin Stevens
Formerly 'o'dium'
Do what mate...?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Oh for the love of God!
It's not new messaging. Phil has said this, many times in the past.
What one person likes, for themselves, doesn't mean it's the best point to use for marketing. Marketing is making things tangible. Marketing is playing on the lowest common denominator. Marketing is appealing to the masses; 4k, graphics and high-fidelity does just that, and has been doing just that for well over a decade.
Gaf really is a comedic goldmine. Are some of you people serious?! Give me a break
Smaller than Atom
Member
I prefer both. So what?
grfunkulus
Banned
Wait, are you suggesting that someone floated making the game blurrier makes the hit boxes easier to make out? How would that work? Definitely turning down effects that create environmental obstructions could be a positive but in something like COD, CS, etc... where shooting first and accurately is key, some baseline of visibility at range would have to be impaired by going under 1080p. I would think that would be pretty important
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
Buy a powerfull pc.
GHG
Member
Seriously, you people thinking that anything he says is from the bottom of his heart is the biggest con since Don Mattrick attempted to convince us that the deadly combination of always on DRM and Kinect was somehow going to be good for us.
Everything this man says is PR/Marketing. Its literally his job and you're a fool to believe otherwise.
The only thing comedic is the cringe worthy hero worshipping of these well paid gaming executives.
Last edited:
grfunkulus
Banned
Well yeah, I still play 16 bit through 64 on my Sony CRT when I feel like hooking it all up. A newer OLED with a decent scaler is a pretty good alternative though!
A consistent(ish) 30fps can feel ok when done right (Destiny, Halo on OG Xbox in the less hectic missions, etc...) but of course, once you've felt those same games at 60fps plus, there's no going back
Vawn
Banned
So Xbox has had a serious lack of quality exclusive software over the last 7 to 10 years and the head of Xbox continues to spend every single day doing interviews?
I'm starting to believe Phil is addicted to the attention he gets on the Internet by doing interviews.
Get us games Spencer. Or just do PR full-time and let someone who can actually run Xbox.
I'm starting to believe Phil is addicted to the attention he gets on the Internet by doing interviews.
Get us games Spencer. Or just do PR full-time and let someone who can actually run Xbox.
Last edited:
CeeJay
Member
Making something lower res doesn't make it blurrier. If you have a low res texture that is upscaled and filtered then it becomes blurry. If you are playing at a low res and everything is rendered at that native res then it will be sharp, ugly as fuck but still sharp.
GHG
Member
Anyone whose jimmies are rustled by that post.
Rolla
Banned
I don't understand the change in PR. Phil and Co have been beating the pixel drum since the first rumours of scorpio and now he prefers frame rate? Something seems off about that. Perhaps the next console is "less powerful" or the games they're bringing to the fore are simply not high in fidelity because they also need to be streamed.
I'm not a "I believe in Phil Spencer" type of gamer. He seems to enjoy pre-emptive PR and contradicts himself way too often imo.
I'm not a "I believe in Phil Spencer" type of gamer. He seems to enjoy pre-emptive PR and contradicts himself way too often imo.
Last edited:
Dee Dah Dave
Member
What about 900p games?
What about them?
If it was up to me then all next gen games would be locked 60fps and some kind of reconstructed 4K. Then the priority can be on great gameplay design and not just making average games look good.
I'm talking about this gen games.
Basically, Phil is saying run your games on high-end PC download from Steam.
Last edited:
grfunkulus
Banned
Sorry my mistake. Yes, I understand that upscaling a natively low textured asset to a high rez will cause blurring.
If the assets are above that game's native rendering rez though, 'releasing' that game from its 720p, or even sub hd, shackles can do wonders and only make details much more visible.
A lot of 640p games on 360 had higher resolution assets (think Halo 3) that were rendered at sub hd resolutions to save on performance but still looked clearer (although just as jagged) as competitors with similar resolutions but lower quality assets (think COD).
Anyway, my point is, if the game has decent underlying asset, and you're skimping on resolution, you're just robbing yourself of detail. The intelligibility of far away objects will suck which makes a difference in comp shooters, obviously.
Last edited:
Dee Dah Dave
Member
I'm talking about this gen games.
Well then the same applies. Frame rate > game mechanics > graphics > resolution
So... Phil should have been saying he never wanted to play on the Xbone.
Developers are not going to reduce the resolution to always hit 60..... fucking Gears of War 4 would have probably needed to be 600p. LOL
Of course, another day... another Phil Said segment.... I'll reduce my Xbone sales forecast again by 10,000 units. He speaks.... sales go down.
Last edited:
Dee Dah Dave
Member
Im telling you what I want, not what somebody else wants. Capisce?!
Developers are not going to always reduce resolution for framerate.... some games don't even need it, imo. Which is why Gears of War 4 wasn't 600p on the Xbone to get to 60fps.
It depends. Either way, sounds like Phil should be playing on high-end PC.
cormack12
Gold Member
I prefer HFR when it's available but let's be honest - most of the stigma round this is games chugging at 23/24fps or sticking performance mode on games that stutter around 45-58fp giving the impression that 30fps is bad or 60fps is not enough. I'd prefer when they say they are 30fps, they remain 30fps for the entire game.
Having said that, if 4K/60fps is the standard then fair enough. In fact, I'd take a 1080p/60fps as standard
Having said that, if 4K/60fps is the standard then fair enough. In fact, I'd take a 1080p/60fps as standard
grfunkulus
Banned
Maybe just the opposite. There was just a leak that Lockheart could be 7.0 to 7.9 TF. Before, people were skeptical it would be higher performing, GPU-wise, than the current Xbone X. If there's a $200 price difference between it and the higher end model, the suggestions of $600 and 1080ti levels of performance could be true.
I was never on the bandwagon of 2080+ (nearing 2080ti) levels of performance for either console because AMD has consistently overpromised and under delivered (even on the CPU side, in purely gaming performance). Even if big navi is a revelation in power and efficiency expecting that level of performance would demand suspending financial reality, and contradicting the laws of physics. No chance a $500 PS5 (which is as high as they would go) eclipses that threshold, as Sony will no longer choose to lose money on hardware. The engineering on the cooling front, not to mention the PSU necessary, just arent feasible. They learned the lesson with early PS3 that overengineering doesnt work out for them.
Last edited:
PropellerEar
Member
Slings and Arrows
Banned
Point to the part of the post where I said xbox 360.
All 360s didn't have hdd, so they didn't make them mandatory.
I'll wait...
CrisPy2019
Member
I prefer resolution and framerate over the rest.
I'd much rather play let's say Luigis Mansion2 (3Ds Game) in 1080p than Luigi's Mansion3 (switch game) in 400*240(3ds Resolution)
Both games keeping their polycount and effects.
I wish consoles would have settings like PCs do...
I'd much rather play let's say Luigis Mansion2 (3Ds Game) in 1080p than Luigi's Mansion3 (switch game) in 400*240(3ds Resolution)
Both games keeping their polycount and effects.
I wish consoles would have settings like PCs do...
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
All day, everyday since they scale beautifully on 4K sets. Push the graphical envelope at a locked 60 in 1080p or 1440p max.
PropellerEar
Member
Keep waiting revisionist...
It’s really incredibly simple. The one x still had a garbage cpu so the focus was always on higher res. The next gen consoles will have far better cpus so they will be capable of higher frame rates as well. Why are you acting like it’s some crazy mystery?
FYI, 120 FPS has been talked about just as much as 8k since E3 in regards the Scarlet.
sunnysideup
Banned
Can we begin with enforcing locked framerates?
No game should ever be alowed to be released if it doesnt atleast have a rock solid locked 30fps with sound framepacing.
No game should ever be alowed to be released if it doesnt atleast have a rock solid locked 30fps with sound framepacing.
Last edited:
GameOfPixelsX
Neo Member
So the developers, that are responsible for all aspect of gaming (aside from power) are now lazy? They should not have the ability to choose less frame rate for fidelity or sacrifice fidelity for more frame rate? That is asinine. You have a right to choose games that fit your preference but, you really have not right to criticize the developers priority.
Mass Shift
Member
He never actually says he prefers rates over resolution in that article.
To the writer of that article -
To the writer of that article -
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Spencer's lead has already come true.
Most of MS's key games released this gen are already 60 fps...... Halo, Gears, both Forza games, Cuphead, Ori, Crackdown. Well, State of Decay and SoT aren't. I think those are 30 fps games tops.
Same can't be said for Sony. Most of their games are 30 fps.
Most of MS's key games released this gen are already 60 fps...... Halo, Gears, both Forza games, Cuphead, Ori, Crackdown. Well, State of Decay and SoT aren't. I think those are 30 fps games tops.
Same can't be said for Sony. Most of their games are 30 fps.
alabtrosMyster
Banned
Get psvr.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked