Support NeoGAF

[IbelieveInGenerations]

WRONG how could you be so fanboyish when its clear which console has more games that will run at 120fps? What's the merit? responsive controls! Fluid visuals. All you are doing is trying to minimize something that is good, because your favourite plastic box can't do it? that's pretty lame.

You clearly didnt understsand anything that I Said.

Do You think that the base Xbox One is more powerfull than PS4 base by any chance?

No It isnt, yet, Gears 5 runs at 60fps on Xbox One or Xbox One S thanks to huge restrictions. What the Xbox Séries X is doing is doublingtl the performance while running at native 4k, Just as PS5 will most likely do with many PS4 titles. This is also what PS4 did with some PS3 titles like The Last of Us

Dirt 5 Will run at 120fps on both consoles, not a problem for PS5 as well so Far.

I am stating reality and simple logic. No famboyism about it.

I am not even making any statement like one console is better or more powerfull than the other or any comparisons like You falsely suggested, Im Just pointing out the obivious fact that this is not something so special taking those games there into account and applying the right context.

 

[Jigsaah]

Well, you saw Halo looks like it could run on a potato so not surprising. To 99% of consumers that 120 means nothing same as 4K. Players want new and exciting games, i for one have yet to see anything.

30 to 60 and to 120 fps is a much more noticeable difference than 1080p to 4k.

 

[Neo_game]

Clickbait. 120fps can help in esports for sure and VR games. But if you are in competition playing on gamepad make very little sense. Keyboard + mouse is definitely the superior way to play shooters, for racing games having a wheel and for fighter I guess having stick.

 

[Drunkensamurai]

Like the average person is going care or know if their TV supports 120 FTPs. Spending money on FPS marketing is useless.

 

[oldergamer]

DAMN. How do they even get these advanced games to run at 120fps?

Keep crying if it makes u feel better. Your argument is weak.

 

[polybius80]

It completely overrides what's happening with the game and cycles input straight into the shell.

I dont understand what you mean here, it doesnt matter if you make inputs many times during frametime any new input generate an interrupt and change its state, what it matter is what the game do when it checks your input in the update/physics phase of your game loop, you cannot override what was decided there you can only provide data to be used in the new update cycle how many updates you do in a second depends the developer

 

[jigglet]

Talking theoretically is stupid. I could talk about the merits of 240hz gaming but I wouldn't know, I've never tried it. The real question is: are there any people here who have genuinely tried 144hz / 120hz but still think it has a negligible difference over 30? And I specifically didn't choose 60, because it's the same people who say 60 is only marginally better than 30, so I'm not going to move those goal posts for you, you're perfectly capable of doing it yourself (I love how the debate is now about 120 vs 60. Where the hell did 60 come from? Yesterday 30 was the preference. lol).

 

[BadBurger]

I think my TV does 140hz? Will 120 make much a difference from 60?

Edit: nevermind I did a quick check on Amazon and it's nowhere near that

 

[brap]

Keep crying if it makes u feel better. Your argument is weak.

Keep coping if it makes u feel better. Wake me up when there's a game on next gen consoles that runs at 120fps and actually looks next gen.

 

[polybius80]

I dont think 120 fps modes will become standard simply because TVs in general lack this feature in a similar way how wii used a standard 480i in composite video(with option to 480p) despite lcd TV with higher resolutions because lot of people still had CRT TVs at the time, 120 fps will probably be an optional mode for people that have TV/Monitors that support that maybe it will be used a lot in VR games since PSVR support 120 hz but I wont be surprised if most devs of non VR games dont give support to this modes it will be cool if they do but most devs wont have time and resources to adapt and optimize games to run at 120 fps

 

[jigglet]

Keep coping if it makes u feel better. Wake me up when there's a game on next gen consoles that runs at 120fps and actually looks next gen.

No both of you are wrong. It's a perfectly valid position to prefer graphics over framerate, while it's also perfectly valid to say framerate is more important than graphics.

What I can't fucking stand are people who have never tried 144fps claiming there's a neglgible difference. Tell me you prefer graphics. That's fine, whatever. Who am I to tell you otherwise? Just don't tell me it's almost imperceptible when you've never actually tried it. There's too much of this ignorance going on here.

 

[Stuart360]

Is it just me or do consoles try and push too far too quick?. I mean consoles have always trailed PC in terms of resolution and framerate, and now they want to match and better PC. We barely got full 1080p this gen, and now they are pushing for 4k next gen. And the majority of console games have always been 30fps percentage wise, and now they are pushing for 120fps.
How about trying to make 60fps the standard first?.

 

[Elog]

Talking theoretically is stupid. I could talk about the merits of 240hz gaming but I wouldn't know, I've never tried it. The real question is: are there any people here who have genuinely tried 144hz / 120hz but still think it has a negligible difference over 30? And I specifically didn't choose 60, because it's the same people who say 60 is only marginally better than 30, so I'm not going to move those goal posts for you (I love how the debate is now about 120 vs 60. Where the hell did 60 come from? Yesterday 30 was the preference. lol).

When I have tested this on my PC set-ups over the years I have found out the following.

- Stable 60 FPS is the best with limited value in going higher than 60 FPS (for me). Variability beyond 60 FPS does little to me in terms of negative impact (so average 90 FPS with dips down to 65 FPS is ok for me)
- Stable 30 FPS is the next best
- Around 60 FPS with high variability (so moments of low FPS in the 30-40 range etc) is the worst

So at least for me the 30-60 FPS range is very sensitive while going beyond 60 FPS does little.

 

[Bryank75]

Surprised it's only 120 fps on Halo... I mean where is all the other power being used?

 

[brap]

No both of you are wrong. It's a perfectly valid position to prefer graphics over framerate, while it's also perfectly valid to say framerate is more important than graphics.

What I can't fucking stand are people who have never tried 144fps claiming there's a neglgible difference. Tell me you prefer graphics. That's fine, whatever. Who am I to tell you otherwise? Just don't tell me it's almost imperceptible when you've never actually tried it. There's too much of this ignorance going on here.

I never said any of that. I'd rather have 60fps be standard on consoles first before they come out with these PS3/PS4 era lookin games so they can brag about 4k 120fps.
It's like they gotta take a step or 2 back in graphics so games can be 4k 120fps now. Who the hell is even playing 120fps on console anyway? Give me the console pleb experience while you PC guys are fucking around with your 8k 120fps VR smell o vision shit 4D haptic feedback shit.

 

[Stuart360]

Surprised it's only 120 fps on Halo... I mean where is all the other power being used?

Halo doesnt look THAT bad Bryank, jesus . You get streamers like the Doc playing at 1080p with medium to low graphics to get 120-140fps in Warzone on his 3900X and 2080ti.

 

[jigglet]

I never said any of that. I'd rather have 60fps be standard on consoles first before they come out with these PS3/PS4 era lookin games so they can brag about 4k 120fps.
It's like they gotta take a step or 2 back in graphics so games can be 4k 120fps now. Who the hell is even playing 120fps on console anyway? Give me the console pleb experience while you PC guys are fucking around with your 8k 120fps VR smell o vision shit 4D haptic feedback shit.

You're saying "you'd rather". You'd rather what? The choice between something you've tried and something you've never experienced?

That's my point.

 

[IbelieveInGenerations]

Halo doesnt look THAT bad Bryank, jesus . You get streamers like the Doc playing at 1080p
with medium to low graphics to get 120-140fps in Warzone on his 3900X and 2080ti.

You really need to go that low even in almighty PC Just to reach of 120fps?

 

[Bryank75]

Halo doesnt look THAT bad Bryank, jesus . You get streamers like the Doc playing at 1080p with medium to low graphics to get 120-140fps in Warzone on his 3900X and 2080ti.

You know I'm just ribbing on you guys. It's all good.

 

[Stuart360]

You really need to go that low even in almighty PC Just to reach of 120fps?

In some games yeah. I mean Warzone doesnt have the greatest optimization, there are other games where you would get over 200fps playing at 1080p with medium settings on a PC like that.
120fps is not an easy thing to do, especially for a console. If Halo mutiplayer looks like the gameplay showcase, and runs at 120fps, it will be a good showing, regardless of how fanboys twist it.

 

[brap]

You're saying "you'd rather". You'd rather what? The choice between something you've tried and something you've never experienced?

That's my point.

Yes. I'd rather have visually impressive games than shit tier looking games that run at 4k 120. When I think 4k I think visually impressive. People want to see Star Wars in 4k not South Park.
Plus consoles are for normies and they don't care about framerate.

 

[jigglet]

Yes. I'd rather have visually impressive games than shit tier looking games that run at 4k 120. When I think 4k I think visually impressive. People want to see Star Wars in 4k not South Park.
Plus consoles are for normies and they don't care about framerate.

Well it's brave of you to have such strong opinions on something you've never tried, but hey what can I say to that.

 

[DavidGzz]

Your tears aren't going to change a thing. The more powerful hardware will run a game faster. Its the same fact sony fans were using at ps4 launch. Why is this expected to be different this time around is beyond me.

Cause the shoe is on the other foot and they can't stand it. They go as far as calling DF MS PR lmao! I'm surprised they don't cry foul when the same game doesn't score lower on Xbox. That's how warped their minds are for their precious box.

 

[Ceadeus]

Can MS actually have good games before they start worrying about 120fps?

Take a look at the Xbox library since the OG Xbox. There is a ton. But yeah, I'm sure you're aware of this but prefer doing drive by comment.

A neo member with the Halo infinite meme as an avatar. How cute

 

[Elog]

Cause the shoe is on the other foot and they can't stand it. They go as far as calling DF MS PR lmao! I'm surprised they don't cry foul when the same game doesn't score lower on Xbox. That's how warped their minds are for their precious box.

This has nothing to do with console warring as such since both the new consoles can push 120 FPS with basically the same strength (slight + to XSX).

The point is that we have not even reached 60 FPS as standard on consoles. MS decides to do cross-generational titles to support game pass since the major part of the installed base is Xbox One, i.e. they won't push graphics all the way for a significant part of the titles. Where should all that power go? FPS!

This is a PR drive from MS based on their cross-generational approach to their games.

I would much more respect DF if they asked the question that Jigglet is asking and tested out how much difference it does to go beyond stable 60 FPS for gamers in general. That would be an interesting article. Now they just drank the MS PR department's spin on the next generation and made an article about it.

 

[Craig of War]

Oh, definitely not just one game. A history that started in the late 360 era, when Xbox thought Kinect was their future. Continued throughout the XBO era. And seems to be happening again next gen. Xbox always overpromising and underdelivering. We've had a poorly received "gameplay" event and one that was supposed to be one filled with mic drops being seen as meh. And Xbox diehards continue the "just wait" mantra.

Well, the not so diehards are starting to wake up. They've been waiting for nearly 7 years, now. I have 3 guys at work who are big Xbox guys. Had 360 and XBO. Just a few months ago, they were mocking PS5, especially when it was first revealed to be less powerful than the XSX. But after both lackluster reveals, they have been mocking Xbox and that Halo reveal, and are seriously considering getting a PS5.

Ok so Xbox is doom cause 3 guys are gone to switch to PS5 got it.

 

[Kagey K]

Ok so Xbox is doom cause 3 guys are gone to switch to PS5 got it.

The funny thing is they will switch right back when they see their favorite games running better on Series X than PS5.

 

[Darlingcognito]

120fps makes you a better gamer no doubt

 

[Nickolaidas]

The more I read MS and MS-friendly YouTubers talk about XSX, the more it sounds like the console is not about the games, but about the features.

Biggest PS5 selling points: SSD, Spider-Man, God of War, The Last of Us, Ghost of Tsushima, Horizon Forbidden West, Ratchet, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy VII ...

Biggest XSX selling points: 12 TFs, 120 fps, Game Pass.

 

[Nickolaidas]

The funny thing is they will switch right back when they see their favorite games running better on Series X than PS5.

Having both an X1X and a Pro, I can safely say that I hardly saw a difference between titles I've owned on both consoles (Dauntless, Shadow Warrior 2). Some titles gave me the IMPRESSION they looked sharper on X1X (MK11, Resident Evil 2, Divinity Original Sin), but that's it. Titles who didn't get the X1X upgrade however, look quite more blurry on the X1X (Alien Isolation, Tekken 7).

In the end, 3rd party games barely look different between those two machines, unless one has a hard-on for DF analysis where a few pebbles will look sharper at 400% zoom-ins which are incapable when one is actually playing.

 

[Silent Viper]

They only made this article because Xbox had more. Most of them Very low class games and Halo, You know... Craig.

120fps sounds completely unecessary to me. Dirt should push for better graphics at locked 60fps.

Nice spin. Basically you saying my beloved ps5 cant run it at 120 fps or struggles to run at even 60fps. So lets call games on other platforms low class.

Only a Sony fanboy will call Ori low class game. Halo multiplayer is 120 fps which is normal for multiplayer games on PC Now we have a console doing that. Craig is in SP lol.

 

[Silent Viper]

Has Microsoft confirmed that this 120 FPS mode is with 4k or a lower res? Because I never claimed 4k 120 FPS is modern gaming. That’s a very limited market And that’s only after the new 3000 series cards are out.. I am assuming this 120 fps mode is with 1080p.

120 fps is optional mode. No its not 4k120. Most probably dynamic resolution.

Why everyone so salty right now. Why bashing Xbox just coz it's running few games at 120 fps?

 

[Silent Viper]

Perfect gif

 

[GiJoint]

“120 FPS sounds completely uneccessary”



could you console plebes please move on and join modern gaming?

I only recently did a full PC build but opted for a 1440p 144hz display. It’s incredibly hard going back to lower frame rates.

 

[DGrayson]

Can MS actually have good games before they start worrying about 120fps?

Don't drive by shit post

 

[ZywyPL]

This article kind of seals it with me that DF has some sort of marketing arrangement with MS. I have been sceptical before but this is as close to a PR BS piece that I have seen from them. Sad.

Which part exactly?

 

[JoeDanny]

The salt flow from SonyGAF lately has been enough to send me into hypernatremic shock. Saying 120FPS doesn't matter this gen is as asinine as saying 60FPS didn't matter at the start of last gen. PC gaming has been reaping the benefit of consistently higher framerates for ages, and it's about time console gamers got to experience just how damn smooth games look above 60FPS.

 

[Sony]

120 FPS and native 4K are, in my opinion, the biggest wastes of resources in a closed box (console). I'd much prefer 1440p + 30/60 FPS + Bells and Whistles. As long as the 120fps is achieved by native scalability of the game engines and there is a 60fps mode with better visuals, I'm fine with it.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

Is there any point to making a list when we dont even known which games are to launch on either console?

 

[Evilms]

From reddit, the dualsense would have a longer range (battery), it's about 3-4 hours longer than DS4.

 

[thelastword]

First of all, why didn't we get a "all next gen games that support raytracing" from DF? I wonder

maybe these multi platforms will not offer 120 FPS on ps5?

Typical statement after 120fps was announced for Dirt on Series X, when it was simply that the dev had not gotten to PS5 details yet....

This article kind of seals it with me that DF has some sort of marketing arrangement with MS. I have been sceptical before but this is as close to a PR BS piece that I have seen from them. Sad.

Yes, we don't even know all the launch games yet. I just posted a thread yesterday of another 120fps PS5 game. And yet, people have to know there will be much more....PD says they may offer a 120fps mode, they even mentioned a curiosity for 240fps, maybe VR related. I can expect that a new Ridge Racer will be 120fps or a new Warhawk. All the BR games could easily shoot for that framerate as well......The truth is, we don't have enough of a comprehensive list at this time. People talk about ORI, but I can see a much more impressive looking game "Concrete Genie" being 120fps on PS5....Sony has the devs to do that easily, a new Hot Shots Golf can easily be 120fps too..

Halo 5 was already 100% locked 60fps
and on X pretty close to full 4k all of the time.
Just because you missed out, it doesnt mean everybody missed out for an entire generation

Halo 5 has not been seen on a Series X yet. At this point we don't even know how much it fluctuates and how much it's graphical settings are dialed back on that system. When we saw Halo Infinite last it was running on a high end PC at 4K native 60fps. That fact that it's dynamic on Series X suggests that it is not handling the game as well as that PC, so rez is being dialed down already and maybe settings. It's curious though because that game does not even have RT yet. So when they do patch in RT what will the performance and rez metrics be like?

Also, if Halo looks like it does at 4k 60fps. I can tell you, I don't want to see what it looks like at 120fps...

Is it just me or do consoles try and push too far too quick?. I mean consoles have always trailed PC in terms of resolution and framerate, and now they want to match and better PC. We barely got full 1080p this gen, and now they are pushing for 4k next gen. And the majority of console games have always been 30fps percentage wise, and now they are pushing for 120fps.
How about trying to make 60fps the standard first?.

Well I guess it depends on where you played because 95% + of PS4 games are 1080p......This was a verified "chew on gold" 1080p gen if you played on PS4...

 

[nikolino840]

For ps5 there's Haven

 

[Rippa]

Cool that it’s an option and all.

I wonder what the graphics will look like at 120fps compared to their 4K/30 and Faux-K/60 counterparts.

 

[FunkMiller]

Jesus Christ, we need to see some more gameplay revealed for both consoles.

 

[Danttte]

This has nothing to do with console warring as such since both the new consoles can push 120 FPS with basically the same strength (slight + to XSX).

The point is that we have not even reached 60 FPS as standard on consoles. MS decides to do cross-generational titles to support game pass since the major part of the installed base is Xbox One, i.e. they won't push graphics all the way for a significant part of the titles. Where should all that power go? FPS!

This is a PR drive from MS based on their cross-generational approach to their games.

I would much more respect DF if they asked the question that Jigglet is asking and tested out how much difference it does to go beyond stable 60 FPS for gamers in general. That would be an interesting article. Now they just drank the MS PR department's spin on the next generation and made an article about it.

From what I see all they did is report the facts. We may or may not like the facts that they reported but to call it a PR drive seems like reactionary fanboyism.

 

[The Hamburglar]

They only made this article because Xbox had more. Most of them Very low class games and Halo, You know... Craig.

120fps sounds completely unecessary to me. Dirt should push for better graphics at locked 60fps.

pretty much. no idea why people act like DF and EG don't have a ridiculous xbox bias.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

pretty much. no idea why people act like DF and EG don't have a ridiculous xbox bias.

If it's just a factual list I don't mind it, but it feels like they included Xbox stuff that's TARGETING 120 FPS but didn't include PS5 stuff that's TARGETING it. Obviously we don't know for sure if any of the games reliably hit the number but if you include games targeting it for one console you should for the other.

New Gran Turismo games to target '120 FPS or even 240 FPS' over higher resolutions - GameRevolution

Polyphonic Digital CEO Kazunori Yamauchi is keen to prioritize frame-rate over resolution when it comes to new Gran Turismo games on PS5.

www.gamerevolution.com

Gran Turismo 7 review: The legend continues

GranTurismo 7 laps the competition on most fronts

www.tomsguide.com

 

[geordiemp]

All cross gen games that are 60 FPS on Xb1 and ps4 can do 120 FPS on next gen. That is logical.

Are we entertained by that ?

There will be allot of them, especially indies.

People trying to read more into it is funny though.

 

[onQ123]

I'm all for the hyper frame rates but something seems a little fishy about this article & I'm not sure if DF did it on their own or if someone from MS talked to them about getting out ahead of time to push this angle.


Phil started pumping his breaks about graphics earlier & started talking about how the biggest difference would be in how the games feel. Until this day I don't think we have seen any games running on Xbox Series X besides Gears of War , Minecraft & the games demoing the quick resume & as of right now we still haven't seen any thing running on Xbox Series X that look much different from what we see on Xbox One S / One X . Maybe they know that it's not going to be easy to show the difference in online videos & people will have to play it for themselves.

 

[Ulysses 31]

- Around 60 FPS with high variability (so moments of low FPS in the 30-40 range etc) is the worst

So at least for me the 30-60 FPS range is very sensitive while going beyond 60 FPS does little.

Was that with or without a G-Sync Display? They can drop all the way down to 1 Hz and 30-40 should still be smoother than fixed 30 fps.