Support NeoGAF

[Xdrive05]

I'm not talking about adjusting the gamma either. If you could lower the draw distance or texture resolution, AA and AF, shader effects, etc., to get 60fps in your console games, would you do it?

These games HAVE existed. I remember playing the demo for Rush 2049 (iirc) on the Dreamcast and it had options to change the draw distance among other things (making it look like foggy shit, but it ran at over twice the framerate - which was a good thing for an arcade racer).

A lot of people are complaining about so few 60fps games on consoles this gen. Would you like the ability to lower your graphics settings to get better framerates?

 

[Pharmacy]

No, a console is not a PC

 

[sankao]

Console games already have low AA and AF. You can't really lower the image quality.

 

[Obaid]

if i want to set the quality of the grafik my self, i will buy a pc :-/

 

[Grayman]

Only for ports of PC centric games like quakes and unreals and such. but they should be hitting 60 naturally anyways...

Actually rendering in the different resolutions to save framerate would be cool. All games in 480 should be 60fps.

 

[Obaid]

Console games already have low AA and AF. You can't really lower the image quality.

Did you ever see R&C:MD or Unreal Tournament 2 or Heavenly Sword?

 

[pubba]

Calling all cats...

 

[Xdrive05]

Console games already have low AA and AF. You can't really lower the image quality.

Yeah, but there are plenty of other things you would be able to lower. Character models, texture resolution, shader effects, draw distance, etc.

 

[nofi]

Did you ever see R&C:MD or Unreal Tournament 2 or Heavenly Sword?

Of course not.

 

[jarrod]

Yep... I'd definitely sacrifice background/texture detail in say, Sega Rally Revo, if it meant upping framerates to a rock solid 60fps. Actually, Sega Racing Studio should seriously consider that as an option (like Smilebit did for Sega Rally 2 DC).

 

[Elios83]

LOL NO, in that way one of the best thing of console gaming would be ruined. Leave that to PC gaming.

 

[Link316]

yes, I only wanna play @ 60 fps

 

[thelurkinghorror]

Depends...

In Bioshock (we recieve the review code some days ago) player can choose from two different settings. The first one let the game run smoothly but with some problem with v-sync. In the other one Bioshock run a little bit slower but without v-sync...

For me this is a good way to implement this kind of features on a console game, it's just a matter of taste. but I hope they don't exaggerate in the future

 

[ShowDog]

The problem is developers are less likely to optimize their games well when they are offering many different quality settings and creating more graphical assets with less detailed models and environments. Framerate whores will win and still frame graphical freaks may win as well, but there will be less middle ground. Otherwise I think it would be a fantastic idea.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

Yes, as long as they bust their ass optimizing the hell out of it first.

Depends...

In Bioshock player can choose from two different settings. The first one let the game run smoothly but with some problem with v-sync. In the other one Bioshock run a little bit slower but without v-sync...

Really? The console version(s)?

 

[ToxicAdam]

I think a lot of devs would wince to think that their game is being played in a condition less optimal than they intended. PC games only have the option because of the varying degrees of performance due to interchangable parts. It's not like the PC devs WANT their game played at less than maxed out ... they just concede it because they need to cater to the largest audience possible.

I can't imagine a dev spending hundreds of man hours into creating these beautiful textures and lighting effects only to know that they will be turned off within 10 minutes by a large chunk of their audience.

 

[snacknuts]

You 60FPS whores crack me up.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

You 'settle for less' whores annoy me.

 

[Arthursw1]

No no & NO! leave all that to PC gaming! that would make game devs lazy!

 

[Warm Machine]

I want to play games the way they were intended to be played.

 

[thelurkinghorror]

Yes, as long as they bust their ass optimizing the hell out of it first.




Really? The console version(s)?

Yes, on the 360 review code...

 

[op_ivy]

i would (and did - sega rally 2 for dreamcast) for racing games at 30.

 

[theBishop]

I think that's the developer's job.

 

[zbarron]

I would like it a lot. SDTV owners would benefit the most since they could turn down the AA, lower the resolution of the textures and cap the games off at 640x480. If they did that the game would be able to pull off amazing things. Also 720p TV owners will benefit once 1080p becomes more prevalent. And anyone could turn down the subtle effects that most people don't appreciate to make the obvious things look better. And you can't forget framerate lovers.

It would be awesome to the max.

 

[jarrod]

The problem is developers are less likely to optimize their games well when they are offering many different quality settings and creating more graphical assets with less detailed models and environments. Framerate whores will win and still frame graphical freaks may win as well, but there will be less middle ground. Otherwise I think it would be a fantastic idea.

Well, it could be more of a case by case thing... some genres would lend themselves better to the option (racers, fps, etc) than others (rpgs, sandbox adventures, etc).

I think it'd be a waste if the idea went industry standard, some games really just don't need it... but I'd argue there are still some that do.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

No, a console is not a PC

.

 

[rs7k]

That would just mean more delays.

 

[lastendconductor]

NO
NO!!

 

[RobertM]

Might as well just play pong at blistering 120 frames a mili second.

 

[AppleMIX]

As long as the frame rate is above 30, I'm happy.

 

[Kabouter]

Wouldn't a 60fps mode with lower settings and a 30fps mode with higher settings be smarter then? Or am I talking nonsense?

 

[Bodom78]

Hell No.

1. Insert Disc
2. Start Playing

The way it should be.

 

[Panajev2001a]

NO!

 

[Xdrive05]

Wouldn't a 60fps mode with lower settings and a 30fps mode with higher settings be smarter then? Or am I talking nonsense?

No, you're not talking nonsense. That's actually what I would prefer too, instead of have a dozen sliders for the player to tweak.

If it's going to be done on consoles, it needs to be easy and straightforward like that IMO.

 

[Creamium]

Hell No.

1. Insert Disc
2. Start Playing

The way it should be.

correct answer

 

[jarrod]

Hell No.

1. Insert Disc
2. Start Playing @ 60fps

The way it should be.

fixed!:lol

 

[op_ivy]

Wouldn't a 60fps mode with lower settings and a 30fps mode with higher settings be smarter then? Or am I talking nonsense?

that would be great. but a lot more work. if both "modes" were optimised, that would rock. and re-reading the thread, this is exactly what i'd want. i do not want a sub menu with sliders where i could change individual settings.

 

[thelurkinghorror]

Hell No.

1. Insert Disc
2. Start Playing

The way it should be.

You forgot the last point:

3. Complain about frame rate / v-sync




BTW... I choose 30 FPS with highest setting instead 60 with medium effect! I played STALKER with highest setting and dynamic lights at 20 FPS!

 

[VNZ]

Console games should be 60fps, cramming in as much as is possible to render in that amount of time. Needless to say, I'm pretty disillusioned by the current state of affairs.

 

[big_z]

the only setting games should have is a gamma config.

 

[tiong_fi]

Saints Row says Hi!

 

[chris0701]

Yeah, but there are plenty of other things you would be able to lower. Character models, texture resolution, shader effects, draw distance, etc.

Because 100 PC gamer may have 10 level of hardware.:lol


Btw,your avatar rocks. Richard Dawkins FTW!!

 

[Haunted]

oh, definitely.


It should still start up with a nice factory setting, as quickly as possible (to address some of the complaints in here), BUT if I'm unhappy with something, I should be able to change it.

Can't see why the option to tweak the settings would hurt.

 

[soco]

i'd be all for it, if it were never to be used as an excuse to not optimize the title, which i'm sure it will be for a lot of people.

 

[Evazan]

Thread title change to : Should i just buy a PC?

 

[Night_Trekker]

You 60FPS whores crack me up.

.

 

[Dorfdad]

YES I WOULD, I think they should make the PS4 with an upgradeable Video Card (more ram for future stuff) and a replaceable memory module basically a shell that parts can be bought and upgraded. Though you must make sure they do not break anything.

Ala MACS closed specific hardware. This way users can spec out there own PS4 and EVERY GAME will work on every console, but some will have better framerates etc..

wow actually after writting all that it sounds wonderful, but pretty impractical as games would be built around the core module most likely.

So no I guess..

 

[DaCocoBrova]

oh, definitely.

Can't see why the option to tweak the settings would hurt.

.

 

[Yoboman]

I wouldn't mind an option to tone down the graphics for a higher frame rate. So long as I can get optimal graphics at a solid 30 too

 

[urk]