Support NeoGAF

[Ysiadmihi]

If the game can handle a steady 60, sure, but IIRC GTA IV was kept at a steady 30 in lieu of going up and down at 60. Must more preferable to have a steady framerate than a bumpy one.

At least on 360, GTA4 was absolutely not locked at 30.

 

[Pimpbaa]

I would rather great graphics instead of 60fps and honestly could care less about 60fps.

 

[camineet]

^awesome :lol

 

[Mileena]

Because gamers can't tell much of a difference and developers are lazy/sloppy. You're lucky to find console games that even maintain 30 fps all the time, these days.

Come to the PC darkside if you want 100+ FPS.

Fixed that for you.

 

[65536]

I hate that "buy a PC" argument when people complain about framerates and/or resolution. With a console being a fixed platform, you expect to have—at the very least—smooth framerates.

The majority of PC games do not interest me any more. The games I want to play are on consoles.

Why is it so bad to want console games that run well? How a game looks is largely down to how good the art is rather than tech anyway. Sure, tech can help it look better, but good art direction looks good no matter what.

60fps with good art & limited tech > 30fps with state of the art effects and bad art direction.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Maybe when people stop praising screen shots we could have that...as if this would ever happen.

My problem with the "30 fps makes for better screenshots" reason is that... we get bullshots anyway.

I would rather great graphics instead of 60fps and honestly could care less about 60fps.

Great frame rate is a part of great graphics.

 

[M°°nblade]

"Some" games now being like, all the most popular ones. Nowadays most popular games are action, sports, etc., and every FPS that has ever been made can benefit from 60fps. Of course, a turned based strategy game or whatever does not need 60fps (an RTS can benefit mightily, though of course), but its not like TBS is today's darling genre.

Imo a game doesn't have to be turn based to justify 30 fps. Many console shooters or action games are too slow to benefit from 60 fps. They simply don't require the responsiveness.

 

[Nikorasu]

Imo a game doesn't have to be turn based to justify 30 fps. Many console shooters or action games are too slow to benefit from 60 fps. They simply don't require the responsiveness.

So does image quality count for nothing anymore? People want amazing visuals, but how smooth and solid the visuals are is extremely important to how they are perceived in motion, responsiveness be damned. The whole industry is so concerned with bloody screenshots that how the game looks when you're actually playing it seem less important. Personally I think a fluid, fast picture is worth cutting back a bit of the shaders and geometry. But then I mostly game on the pc, so whatever.

 

[dzukela]

60fps with good art & limited tech > 30fps with state of the art effects and bad art direction.

how about:
30fps with good art & state of the art effects > 60fps with bad art direction & limited tech ???

 

[Error]

honestly if games like DMC/NG and RPGs like Tales/SO are not 60fps, then that would definitely bother me, and irritate me even. Heck, I think all FPS games should be 60fps, too.

60fps means more precise controls and better animation. The difference is HUGE between 30/60 specially if you are constantly playing games at 60fps then suddenly pop in one that runs at 30fps. if you can't tell the difference, then you must have your eyes checked.

the amount of games that run at sub-30fps this gen is fucking embarrassing.

60FPS is smooth, but 30FPS feels more cinematic.

 

[Durante]

My problem with the "30 fps makes for better screenshots" reason is that... we get bullshots anyway.

But bullshots normally only increase the image quality, not stuff like texture resolution, poly counts or effects. (Personally I'd be easily willing to make sacrifices in each of those to get at least 720p 60fps with 4xAA, but I do realize the marketing problems with such an approach)