-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
DigitalFoundry: Hands-on with PS4 1080p 30fps...!!
- Thread starter ahm998
- Start date
Pop
Member
F-ck 60 fps I want good resolution, AA and tons of effects, but even without all of those, if a game is great (I mean DAMN good), people won't care.
An extreme example is this:
I love Halo, I owned a ps2 back then and I was envying those who had an xbox just because they could play with it. Then, when Halo 1 came out on pc I put together a lame pc which could barely run Halo in very low settings. I still remember all those moments when I've finished the game on christmas day. Barely 20 fps but I literally couldn't stop playing.
Give me my 20 fps crappy looking games any time over those uber-responsive 60 fps pixel-rainbows of today.
My point is, that if a game is good, plays good enough, people shouldn't care about framerates.
I find the lack of people's enthusiasm disturbing.
An extreme example is this:
I love Halo, I owned a ps2 back then and I was envying those who had an xbox just because they could play with it. Then, when Halo 1 came out on pc I put together a lame pc which could barely run Halo in very low settings. I still remember all those moments when I've finished the game on christmas day. Barely 20 fps but I literally couldn't stop playing.
Give me my 20 fps crappy looking games any time over those uber-responsive 60 fps pixel-rainbows of today.
My point is, that if a game is good, plays good enough, people shouldn't care about framerates.
I find the lack of people's enthusiasm disturbing.
It's odd, because I have no problem with 30fps games locked on consoles. Anything in the 30-40 range on PC though and I can't fucking stand it.
Perhaps it has to do with better frame smoothing on consoles or the distance from which I'm viewing? (10-12 ft for console, 4ft for PC)
Perhaps it has to do with better frame smoothing on consoles or the distance from which I'm viewing? (10-12 ft for console, 4ft for PC)
CassidyIzABeast
Member
20fps isn't playable.
RibbedHero
Member
/sarcasm I assume?
Viewing distance certainly makes resolution far less important, I really think consoles should just be 720p because at 10ft viewing distances, you'd be hard to tell it from 1080p (truthfact)
Want to appreciate 4k resolution, stand 1 inch from it, seriously your be amazed by the dots (Im serious, and no I dont expect people to view that close, and yet it looks awesome from further back to but you lose DEM pixels)
720p 60fps should be attainable all day everyday now.
They could certainly set their sights higher and 30 fps is starting to seem like a crutch that can be leaned on and glossed over with some extra effects at around 30 fps. If they always locked down 30 fps it'd be less of an issue, but games too often leave even that goal unchecked.
You will be able to, but it'll be more apparent side by side.
Try these:
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/
http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html
Glorified G
Member
Pop
Member
qa_engineer
Member
If a game runs at a stable 30fps and looks like the screenshots below then I could care less.
and this
and this
CassidyIzABeast
Member
If it ran at 60fps and looked close to that it would be even better.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
This thread continues to devolve into a carnival of stupid.
qa_engineer
Member
Nizz
Member
This I agree with wholeheartedly. 30fps would never be a problem as long as it's a rock solid, never dipping below 30fps. It's when it falls below that target that things (to me) get rough.
Would I prefer 60fps? Hell yes. Sure, let a game's resolution be 720p but a smooth 60fps which I think Battlefield 4 will be. I don't think DICE/EA have made a bullet point about being 1080p but they sure have reminded us that the game will run at 60fps. I for one can't wait to get my hands on it.
I'm pretty glad that some devs have been targeting 60fps. So far off the top of my head some games that will be 60fps are: Battlefield 4, COD: Ghosts, Warframe, Blacklight. I'm thrilled they're shooting for that framerate.
And sure, some games are fine at 30fps, as long as they're a solid 30. Since a lot of these games aren't finished yet they get the benefit of the doubt. I just hope that when they are finished that they are at a locked 30fps.
Nope. It is true, 20 fps was an average, 18 was min, 22-23 was max. It is safe to say this is an extreme example tough.
Bill Rizer
Member
/thread?
CambriaRising
Member
Obviously.
Things are what they are, there is nothing anyone can do about it so who cares?
Edit: What I mean to say is that the resolution, AA solution, FPS, etc can always be better. 30fps is a standard for most development studios who work exclusively on consoles and most types of games are perfectly playable at that.
I get mad when developers release games at sub 24fps on consoles, but getting mad at them not hitting 60 all of the time is a bit ridiculous. You are going to be very mad, very often.
Junior Mint
Member
YOU DON'T SAY?
Yes but considering that it probably can't look close to that and run at 60 since console hardware is locked you don't have much of a point.
I love 60fps and I'll take it whenever I can but 30 is sufficient for me for most games.
Is now a good time to throw in the suggestion that I'd take 720p with great AA and overal IQ over raw 1080p?
for framerate I'll take whichever is better for the type of game, I'm happy with 30fps but would prefer 60 for racing games. Even saying that there are racing games that look great at 30fps with motion blur eg PGR3
for framerate I'll take whichever is better for the type of game, I'm happy with 30fps but would prefer 60 for racing games. Even saying that there are racing games that look great at 30fps with motion blur eg PGR3
CassidyIzABeast
Member
lol, 4 posts in a row. I'm flattered guys, really.
Pop
Member
I meant games that are launching at 30fps, my bad.
Glorified G
Member
Rick Dangerous
Banned
This.
The difference between 30fps and 60fps never constitutes a "close" graphical difference. It's usually quite a large one. Part of the reason games like COD Ghosts and Titan Fall look relatively arse compared to other next gen games, and also largely why Forza 5 lacks dynamic lighting, night/day transitions etc (at least for launch). Some people are falsely under the impression that a 60fps game only has to look marginally worse than a 30fs game, this is wrong. The differences will likely be large, and this will be more evident at launch, and further in to the consoles lives.
DukeTogo1300
Member
This is what devs have been doing forever, maxing out the graphics with a 30fps minimum limit. No amount of power will keep them from playing to their proven market, that extra 30fps just isn't worth the extra graphical potential.
Yeah, it is frustrating, but as long as 30 is locked down tight, most games will be fine.
Yeah, it is frustrating, but as long as 30 is locked down tight, most games will be fine.
qa_engineer
Member
Agreed. If the can pull off all the bells and whistles with 60fps then great, but if the visuals take a hit because of 60fps then I'd rather have the pretty graphical and a stable 30.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
A few devs chose 60fps over 30fps last gen though, because it improved the responsiveness of the controls. I heard CoD sold pretty well. Maybe it's not a bad strategy.
DukeTogo1300
Member
I wasn't speaking in absolutes about all game devs, only those that don't value 60fps, which seems to be most of them. 30fps is a threshold this market accepts for most genres, it has become the rule instead of the exception. Expecting this new generation of consoles to trend towards 60fps across the board just doesn't work, because that was more than possible last gen (and the one before that), and they didn't go for it then either. Expect more sub-native resolution tricks too, because some will even struggle with 30fps.
Devs like Polyphony got 1080p/60fps last gen, and they likely will again this gen, as will any dev that has done it in the past or decides to make it a focus now. I love it when devs go for 60, and try to support them as much as I can. There is no doubt 60fps gameplay does what you say, absolutely agree with you.
Paracelsus
Member
Bad IQ is the priority, it needs to be eliminated. 720p should have been mandatory for 2006, now 1080p is.
The problem is not 30fps, it's that they can't have true 30fps nor lock them, they just aren't able to.
The problem is not 30fps, it's that they can't have true 30fps nor lock them, they just aren't able to.
unholyrevenger72
Banned
Can't we compromise and go 45 FPS
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
They aren't 30fps.
Tallshortman
Member
CoD4 also nailed gunplay and it was a contender for best console graphics when it came out. BF3 runs at 30fps on consoles and sold a shit ton too, generally speaking the casual consumer will look at graphics and gameplay over fps, with some exceptions like fighting games which have to run at 60fps or it's a joke. For some games I'd love 60fps but others like single player centric games I'll take 30 fps with better graphics.
PS5 4k 30fps with no option of 1080p60fps confirmed.. A game designed to run 30fps at 1080p is not guaranteed to run 60fps @ 720p, but a game set to run 60fps at 720p should easily do a stable 1080p30fps, that should please pixel counters. I'd rather be given options.
Given the current situation it is not hard to say that when ps5 comes, devs will be targeting 4k to push those TVs Sony will want to sell us, and they will probably not optimise for 60fps gameplay at lower resolutions.
Given the current situation it is not hard to say that when ps5 comes, devs will be targeting 4k to push those TVs Sony will want to sell us, and they will probably not optimise for 60fps gameplay at lower resolutions.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I'm not expecting every game to trend towards 60fps, but devs sure seem really enthusiastic about it compared to last gen. Halo 4, BF4 and Blacklight are all targeting 60fps. If they drop to 30fps for the sequels some players might prefer the predecessor even if they don't know what a framerate is. That's the boat CoD is in right now. It's an interesting dilemma.
I prefer 1080p 60fps with slightly worse graphics to be honest. Next gen consoles are powerful enough so that 1080p should be the standard. To me, releasing a 720p game on a next gen console is the same as releasing an SD game on a ps360. You might be able to get "better" graphics by using a lower resolution but they'll get smeared by the upscaling process so what's the point?
DukeTogo1300
Member
Well, lower resolutions put less pressure on the game asset side of things. I guess games with huge asset banks, like open world games or racing sims that attempt 1,000 cars, would benefit more from such a limitation.
I figure there will be plenty of smaller studios this gen whose fans will forgive them for 720p, especially when they consider how many studios struggled last gen because that lower resolution option wasn't on the table.
I also think 720p can look crisp enough in the HD-age with a moderate amount of AA applied. It is much closer to 1080p than 480p was to 720p.
I prefer 60fps no matter the resolution, but I'm fine with 30 if that is what is best for the game, and this should always be assessed game-to-game.
velociraptor
Junior Member
God Of War 3 runs at 45+ fps and is the best looking console game. Why not an in between solution?
I remember how 60FPS PS2 games were actually the best looking games. MGS2, Gran Turismo 4, God Of War 1/2, Devil May Cry 3. Heh.
Or, perhaps devs should implement a dynamic framebuffer ala Wipeout HD. I think we can all agree this is perhaps the cleanest looking console title out there. It maintains 60FPS but switches from 1920x1080p to 1280x1080p on the fly.
But personally, framerate does not bother me too much as long as it's locked and smooth. I do not want to see 1080p sacrificed.
ChorusLindarr
Banned
This is a rather oversimplified view that doesn't really apply to modern games. As games on PS2 were relatively much less complex with only the most basic effects, texturing and particle effects. Nowadays modern GPUs have programmable shaders, and modern games will need to handle all the various alpha, texture, light and normal maps, texture filtering, material shaders, compute shaders, GI systems, post-effects, streaming systems, physics, game code as well as anti-aliasing.
It's an order of magnitude more that needs to be computed per frame, that means that going from 30fps to 60 will mean a far greater discernible compromise in visual quality. Essentially the more complex video games get, the greater the disparity between what can be done at 30fps compared to 60fps.
velociraptor
Junior Member
I suppose.
Personally I don't mind too much although certian genres must be 60fps. This includes racing games, platform games, action games, and fighting games. As for everything else, it would be a nice bonus.
I would just hope that we don't see a repeat of devs pushing a system too hard at the expensive of keeping a smooth, locked 30fps.
I would rather take a locked framerate as opposed to one that is completely sporadic.
Part of me did hope that this generation would be the one where devs finally target 1080p60. It appears to me on GAF at least 60FPS is more important than any graphical upgrades - despite looking average, many people are impressed with Titanfall.
Gorgon
Member
People exagerate the importance of 60fps to extremes. Obviously, 60fps are better than 30fps. I don't think anyone can honestly say otherwise. We're not talking about movies here. But assuming that 30fps can be locked and stable, it will depend entirely on the game. For racing games, competitive multiplayer shooters or otherwise, fighting games, etc, 60fps are obviously the target and eye candy should be reduced to achieve 60fps. But for other games, including many single-player shooters, RPGs, etc, I'll take eye candy and a rock-solid 30fps any day over 60fps and reduced eye candy.
I would prefer the ability to choose while playing the game.