Support NeoGAF

[LCGeek]

Well who is gonna wanna play a competitive 30fps MP FPS on X1 when your gonna get matched up against 60fps Scorpio players?

I'm assuming most people cause most console consumers don't care about a lack of performance parity after a certain point.

and as I've said in other topics your fps don't mean shit vs what non SQM connection gets vs one that has it in an online title.

 

[Jaguar Victory]

Honestly I'd be happy with 4k30 but 1440(cbr4k)60 would be a treat.

 

[Zakalwe]

It's amazing how wrong you are. This will be proven in time. When Scorpio launches I will go back and quote your posts as points of reference for how ridiculously erroneous your take on this was.

Scorpio finally brings the beauty of hardware superiority to console gaming and it's going to be amazing. Pro should do the same. Forced parity bullshit rules are ridiculous.

Good Day.

Sure, time will tell.

 

[PackAPunchedMick]

Not really, as long as they have a good library of 4K games. They can't avoid some games not being 4K, especially from launch.

You are just creating an unrealistic scenario where the Scorpio will fail in your mind. I bet you are already ready to shit on Scorpio when the first non 4K game is released.

Sony advertises Pro as "dynamic 4k" meaning maybe, maybe not....

Microsoft advertises Scorpio as "true 4k"

If both consoles have games that are not 4k which one of them is lying?

 

[Jaguar Victory]

Sony advertises Pro as "dynamic 4k" meaning maybe, maybe not....

Microsoft advertises Scorpio as "true 4k"

If both consoles have games that are not 4k which one of them is lying?

Dynamic 4k is such a clever marketing term for non core gamers. I mean they both have 4k but this one is DYNAMIC so that has to be better than regular right? They're playing on the general populations lack of basic English knowledge and it's a pretty smart tactic.

 

[Trup1aya]

No, it's not valid because the PC gives the option to cultivate your own experience in terms of the visual performance ratio.

Console, outside of a few mostly very basic examples, does not.

You can "cultivate" your experience by choosing the hardware that meets your needs...

In either case there are disparities.

 

[Zakalwe]

You can "cultivate" your experience by choosing your hardware.

Not if you can't afford it you can't.

If I can't a afford a new PC, I can turn the graphics down on MP to get 60fps.

If I can't afford the upgraded console, I'm stuck with the lesser experience (performance wise).

 

[hanspampel]

Sony advertises Pro as "dynamic 4k" meaning maybe, maybe not....

Microsoft advertises Scorpio as "true 4k"

If both consoles have games that are not 4k which one of them is lying?

none
because no company said "every single game, that will ever release on our platform will have a native resolution of at least 3840 × 2160 pixel not matter what"

 

[SenjutsuSage]

So you Think Scorpio will run D2 at 60fps.?

Don't think it will, probably because it wasn't really a goal for them to be above 30 on console, especially with them leading on PS4 and the Pro, but I absolutely believe Scorpio can run Destiny 2 at 60fps. If PS4 Pro runs it at true 4K at 30, I find it fairly difficult to believe Scorpio with the stated specs can't double the framerate, particularly with assistance from Microsoft towards that end.

Maybe if PS4 Pro could only manage the game at less than true 4K and a solid 30, I might be inclined to believe then that perhaps Scorpio can't also do true 4K with double the framerate. It might just be Bungie and Activision's desire to not give the preference of better performance to any of the mid gen refresh consoles, regardless of which happens to be more powerful.

There's some evidence of this with the first Destiny release. I believe it was 1080p 30 on both PS4 and Xbox One. If the Xbox One could achieve 1080p 30, then surely the PS4 could get higher than 30fps in the original Destiny. Would it have been a solid 60? I can't really say for certain, but I do think there will be a bigger difference in performance between Pro and Scorpio than there was for Xbox One and PS4. It may not ever appear as stark as it might have seemed between Xbox One and PS4 especially in those early days due to devs getting up to speed with how best to utilize the ESRAM, but I believe it's there.

 

[Hermii]

Sony advertises Pro as "dynamic 4k" meaning maybe, maybe not....

Microsoft advertises Scorpio as "true 4k"

If both consoles have games that are not 4k which one of them is lying?

Microsoft has said on record devs can do whatever they want with the power. Wether they use it for resolution or other things is up to devs.

If ms first party games run native, they kept their promise.

 

[Hexer06]

These Scorpio threads sure are fun to read sometimes. I think this is good news. Just like I think it's good they don't mandate devs to make every game 4k. Let the devs decide what to do, but I sure do hope they take advantage of the Scorpio. E3 will be soon! Then things are really gonna start heating up. Lol

 

[nekkid]

The 60fps benefit is obvious, it doesn't need testing or proving.

Because it's a huge disparity and would have a backlash from the core community who are inherent to building a successful franchise. They're the ones who praise and critique the loudest, they register on forums to discuss and feedback, they put videos on YT, they rally the troops for the positive and negative.

They will not do something that so drastically shifts the fairness of online play.

You saying it's "obvious" doesn't make it true. Where are the receipts? 60fps feels better, but does that make 95% of gamers play substantially better?

You really think this ? Why do you think COD sells 20 million every single year ?

60 FPS instant control fast gameplay is recognised by the market.

If COD went 30 FPS it would die instantly.

You're missing the point. It's not about dropping a game universally from 60fps to 30fps.

 

[AndrewRyan]

If you only play single-player games it's no problem, but since there's competitive multi-player games, buying a Scorpio is essentially getting a pay-to-win advantage for multi-player games. Yes, this screws over the OG owners who care about winning online games. Probably will end up being the number one reason people upgrade. (PS Pro too)

 

[Zakalwe]

You saying it's "obvious" doesn't make it true. Where are the receipts? 60fps feels better, but does that make 95% of gamers play substantially better?

It is obvious, though.

60fps has double the frames which allows for better precision and much faster reaction times. It's objective that playing at 60fps vs 30fps has clear benefits.

 

[nekkid]

It is obvious, though.

60fps has double the frames which allows for better precision and much faster reaction times. It's objective that playing at 60fps vs 30fps has clear benefits.

Where did I say there was no benefit?

 

[SmoothRunningGun]

False. They made a point to specifically state they cant discuss details of the Scorpio version yet. You. Are. Wrong.

When they say 30fps on consoles, Scorpio isn't included in that because the Scorpio version is still under wraps.

It may be the same in the end but we don't know for sure yet.

You guys need to stop with this. The scorpio CPU is barely better than the pro. The game isn't going to double in framerate over a slight freq bump. They didn't say because of NDA but what they said about pro basically confirms it. But it you want to live in fantasy land go right ahead.

 

[Trup1aya]

Not if you can't afford it you can't.

If I can't a afford a new PC, I can turn the graphics down on MP to get 60fps.

If I can't afford the upgraded console, I'm stuck with the lesser experience (performance wise).

There is no scenario where a person on pc with better hardware can't have better performance than someone with lesser hardware. Just as you can turn your settings down to reach 60fps, they can turn things on to provide an advantage- even higher framerates, higher resolutions, better FOV, better LODs , better AA etc.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Maybe I'm overreacting, which is very possible, but I'm kind of shocked that this isn't bigger news. This thread drops pretty quickly. This announcement/confirmation destroys the very present "parity myth" and is bigger than just Destiny 2. Means a lot moving forward with the Scorpio and hopefully Pro

 

[Zakalwe]

There is no scenario where a person on pc with better hardware can't have better performance than someone with lesser hardware. Just as you can turn your settings down to reach 60fps, they can turn things on to provide an advantage- even higher framerates, higher resolutions, better FOV, better LODs , better AA etc.

The gulf between 30fps and 60 is not found again. 60 -144 doesn't have the same gulf, nor do the graphical bells and whistles. Which is why 60fps is so often called for as a baseline.

In fact, in many competitive games people turn down the graphical effects even if they don't have to because they can be distracting.

Where did I say there was no benefit?

The benefits it has are obvious in their scope, too. Your call for testing is unnecessary.

 

[Frostburn]

Developers being free to choose and not having artificial limits for parity works for me. Excited to see what they have to show at E3.

 

[godhandiscen]

Gonna be 4k 60fps

I wish.

 

[nekkid]

The benefits it has are obvious in their scope, too. Your call for testing is unnecessary.

I disagree that they're obvious.

Prove to me that 60fps vs 30fps has any more of an effect than differing network connections, higher resolution, better controller - all of which are already accepted variations of configurations on consoles.

Even better, take off the top 1 or 2 percent of elite gamers (who are probably going to have the more powerful device anyway) and then tell me whether, considering the existing variations above, it would make any genuinely significant competitive difference across all games played.

"Because it would" isn't an answer.

 

[Trup1aya]

The gulf between 30fps and 60 is not found again. 60 -144 doesn't have the same gulf, nor do the graphical bells and whistles. Which is why 60fps is so often called for as a baseline.

In fact, in many competitive games people turn down the graphical effects even if they don't have to because they can be distracting.

I'm not talking about "graphical effects" I'm talking about performance enhancements.

Sure the gulf between 30-60 is most easily perceiveable, but faster is still better. Also higher framerates is just 1 of several advantages I've described. 60 is a "baseline" but it isn't best available.

If a person with a weak PC can turn things off to get 60. Someone with a better PC can turn those same things off, get more than 60, and still have a higher resolution, FOV, better LODs and AA and all of these things would give them an advantage in an FPS.

 

[SMOK3Y]

Maybe I'm overreacting, which is very possible, but I'm kind of shocked that this isn't bigger news. This thread drops pretty quickly. This announcement/confirmation destroys the very present "parity myth" and is bigger than just Destiny 2. Means a lot moving forward with the Scorpio and hopefully Pro

What & why?

 

[Green Yoshi]

It's a big mistake from Microsoft to not make Scorpio the successor of the One. It could still be backwards compatible, look at the PS2 and Wii. Imagine all games for 360 would have been released for Xbox OG, too. It would have made the 360 a less better console.

 

[K.Jack]

I disagree that they're obvious.

Prove to me that 60fps vs 30fps has any more of an effect than differing network connections, higher resolution, better controller - all of which are already accepted variations of configurations on consoles.

Even better, take off the top 1 or 2 percent of elite gamers (who are probably going to have the more powerful device anyway) and then tell me whether, considering the existing variations above, it would make any genuinely significant competitive difference across all games played.

"Because it would" isn't an answer.

There's so such information out there about framerates, you have to be willfully ignorant to be in 2017 asking people to prove that 60fps gives an advantage.

 

[cakely]

Interesting decision. I would be annoyed if I was playing an online shooter at 30fps and some of my opponents had the advantage of playing at 60fps.

Then again, I'm probably getting an Xbox One Scorpio, so it will be me with the advantage. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Really curious to see how games look and run on Pro and Scorpio a couple years down the line

 

[geordiemp]

Really curious to see how games look and run on Pro and Scorpio a couple years down the line

Games look better but run the same. Read the thread.

 

[Zakalwe]

I'm not talking about "graphical effects" I'm talking about performance enhancements.

Sure the gulf between 30-60 is most easily perceiveable, but faster is still better. Also higher framerates is just 1 of several advantages I've described. 60 is a "baseline" but it isn't best available.

If a person with a weak PC can turn things off to get 60. Someone with a better PC can turn those same things off, get more than 60, and still have a higher resolution, FOV, better LODs and AA and all of these things would give them an advantage in an FPS.

Obviously... but it's nowhere near the gulf of 30fps vs 60fps.

I disagree that they're obvious.

Prove to me that 60fps vs 30fps has any more of an effect than differing network connections, higher resolution, better controller - all of which are already accepted variations of configurations on consoles.

Even better, take off the top 1 or 2 percent of elite gamers (who are probably going to have the more powerful device anyway) and then tell me whether, considering the existing variations above, it would make any genuinely significant competitive difference across all games played.

"Because it would" isn't an answer.

60fps allows for much greater precision and reaction time and the extra clarity in motion makes picking out targets much easier, for example. Anyone who has extensive experience playing a game at 30 and 60fps, or comparable games, can tell you the difference is huge. If you need science google for it, or perhaps someone else could provide it, but the difference is massive and it's obvious why.

 

[Yarbskoo]

I expect some games to run with slightly worse performance somehow, like certain Pro titles.

I disagree that they're obvious.

Prove to me that 60fps vs 30fps has any more of an effect than differing network connections, higher resolution, better controller - all of which are already accepted variations of configurations on consoles.

Even better, take off the top 1 or 2 percent of elite gamers (who are probably going to have the more powerful device anyway) and then tell me whether, considering the existing variations above, it would make any genuinely significant competitive difference across all games played.

"Because it would" isn't an answer.

Hang on, I'm gonna go play Overwatch at 30 fps I'll let you know how it goes.

Gold elims, but an exceptionally shitty team.

2% better accuracy at 60 frames, but the main difference is that it's actually fun to play. Also we won this time.

720/60 > 1080/30

 

[Trup1aya]

Obviously... but it's nowhere near the gulf of 30fps vs 60fps.

Advantages are advantages

 

[CallMeTy]

How big would the competitive difference really be between 30fps vs 60fps on an console shooter environment? Because the way some of ya'll are making it sound, if someone is playing at 30fps, and does alright, and then upgrades to 60fps they will automatically do better than the competition who is playing at 30 still.

Would it really be that great of a difference to really matter?

Mind you, I'm not talking about overall enjoyment here because it looks pretty, 60fps over everything, but would it increase the average players performance just from the FPS upgrade?

 

[Ivory Samoan]

Still not getting 60 fps on destiny 2 though.

I agree, it's not going to happen - especially with Sony's deal with Activision re: the game.

It'll look amazing in 4K though with no doubt even more bells and whistles thrown in vs the Pro version (I'm playing on Pro and PC later on if there's crosssave, for the record).

 

[Yarbskoo]

How big would the competitive difference really be between 30fps vs 60fps on an console shooter environment? Because the way some of ya'll are making it sound, if someone is playing at 30fps, and does alright, and then upgrades to 60fps they will automatically do better than the competition who is playing at 30 still.

Would it really be that great of a difference to really matter?

Mind you, I'm not talking about overall enjoyment here because it looks pretty, 60fps over everything, but would it increase the average players performance just from the FPS upgrade?

A player with an advantage, however small, will still do better on average than a player on the same skill level without that advantage.

Not that it should really be an issue. The fact that there are still competitive shooters that don't target at least 60fps is laughably absurd. Developers are letting the scope of their projects go too far beyond the constraints of the hardware.

 

[CallMeTy]

A player with an advantage, however small, will still do better on average than a player on the same skill level without that advantage.

Not that it should really be an issue. The fact that there are still competitive shooters that don't target at least 60fps is laughably absurd. Developers are letting the scope of their projects go too far beyond the constraints of the hardware.

Oh yeah I'm aware of the advantage I'm just wondering if it would be so much of a difference or issue that it would be cause for an outcry.

Developers are letting the scope of their projects go too far beyond the constraints of the hardware.

Would that blame be placed on sony/microsoft, developers, or both? IDK i'm not a console maker (lol) but would you say that they put the best hardware in these machines based on the time of release and at a reasonable cost? (Pro/Scorpio)

EDIT: Crow eating season coming soon at E3 apparently. Can't wait...

 

[CallMeTy]

*DOUBLE POST*

 

[Banamy]

I just want my ssj3 xbox to use all its power.

 

[Heigic]

devs choice is the way it should be.

 

[JayhawkerStL]

Well who is gonna wanna play a competitive 30fps MP FPS on X1 when your gonna get matched up against 60fps Scorpio players?

PC gamers?

 

[jesu]

Well who is gonna wanna play a competitive 30fps MP FPS on X1 when your gonna get matched up against 60fps Scorpio players?

Won't bother me for one

 

[gamz]

Well who is gonna wanna play a competitive 30fps MP FPS on X1 when your gonna get matched up against 60fps Scorpio players?

Bring it!

 

[Zok310]

I feel that Scorpio will be either a great success or an exploding failure, no in between.

Only the price is going to determine that, not if it can run 60fps or not. If the price is right people will jump on and if MS wants fair pvp between XB1 and Scorpio players then FPS will be spec'd at XB1 across both consoles for PVP.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

Just reading gaf and the webs, it's hard to understand why anyone would think the Scorpio would do this game and others at 4k60 with the jaguar.

I remember reading how Scorpio wouldn't have the jaguar according to others because it too weak. But now it's capable?

Perhaps so many wouldn't be devastated if they had somewhat realistic expectations

 

[CallMeTy]

Just reading gaf and the webs, it's hard to understand why anyone would think the Scorpio would do this game and others at 4k60 with the jaguar.

I remember reading how Scorpio wouldn't have the jaguar according to others because it too weak. But now it's capable?

Perhaps so many wouldn't be devastated if they had somewhat realistic expectations

Yeah 4k60 seems crazy, I'll be happy with 1080p60 and i'm pretty sure everybody else would too.

 

[Gearless]

I'm assuming that MS is giving developers their blind loyalty when it comes to developing games for the platform.

Only the price is going to determine that, not if it can run 60fps or not. If the price is right people will jump on and if MS wants fair pvp between XB1 and Scorpio players then FPS will be spec'd at XB1 across both consoles for PVP.

Yeah, the pricing has to be good to hit the American/UK public with maximum precision. Though, I do hope it sparks some much needed interest in the other Europeans countries, but I doubt such thing will happen now.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

Developers can do what they want and what they want is the same framerate.

 

[nekkid]

60fps allows for much greater precision and reaction time and the extra clarity in motion makes picking out targets much easier, for example. Anyone who has extensive experience playing a game at 30 and 60fps, or comparable games, can tell you the difference is huge. If you need science google for it, or perhaps someone else could provide it, but the difference is massive and it's obvious why.

I'm sick of having to repeat my point, but I'll do it again to attempt to get it to sink in.

I am NOT saying there is zero advantage.

Is that advantage significant enough to be worth denying people with capable hardware the opportunity to have a nicer 60fps? Is it more than existing variables seen on consoles?

If that guy's above experiment is anything to go by, then clearly it's not.

 

[Hawk269]

Dynamic 4k is such a clever marketing term for non core gamers. I mean they both have 4k but this one is DYNAMIC so that has to be better than regular right? They're playing on the general populations lack of basic English knowledge and it's a pretty smart tactic.

Yeah it really has helped them sell a ton of units. Pro is not selling well and it is mainly due to Sony not advertising the unit or really doing anything to make the general public aware of it. It was almost like a stealth release. Perhaps that will change with E3 and going into holiday, but as it stands right now, Pro is not lighting up the sales charts.

 

[-hadouken]

Really curious to see how games look and run on Pro and Scorpio a couple years down the line

I wouldn't get too excited. They will continue to do exactly what they were designed to do: boost the resolution of the current generation of games.