Yeah, as nice as it could be for the few possible benefits it might offer, i think the people who want this are ignoring the possible down sides.. things could get very sloppy further into the gen.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
It's time for (limited)graphics settings in console games!
- Thread starter 7DollarHagane
- Start date
Yeah, as nice as it could be for the few possible benefits it might offer, i think the people who want this are ignoring the possible down sides.. things could get very sloppy further into the gen.
I made the same thread time ago and it was an overkill lol, pc gamers seems to be pissed at the idea.
About optimizations i can agree for exclusives, but what about multis with PC? Developers already wasted their time on options, on consoles they should just add something like:
Display
-1080p 30fps(default)
-720p 60fps
(just an example)
That's all, no one is asking for deep customizations like on PC.
About optimizations i can agree for exclusives, but what about multis with PC? Developers already wasted their time on options, on consoles they should just add something like:
Display
-1080p 30fps(default)
-720p 60fps
(just an example)
That's all, no one is asking for deep customizations like on PC.
That's just not how it works.
I know you said it's just an example, but the same problem comes up with almost all the option ideas. Due to fixed refresh rate displays console games generally target either 30 or 60 FPS. And adding any "simple" setting won't get you from 30 to 60.
7DollarHagane
Banned
Well then either 720p unlocked (because many console games see no effect by dropping resolution in console settings)
Or
A preset graphics mode that aims for 60fps when possible by reducing shaders, draw distance, etc.
I was simplifying to make it clear with few words, obviously there's more than that but as i said if you already made the customization work for the pc version you can do a similar but more limited one for consoles(for example you could use high res textures for a setting and lower res ones for another)
A little more elaborate example(but still simplified):
1080p 60fps bad graphics
1080p 30fps decent graphics
720p 60fps decent graphics(different from the previous)
720p 30fps max graphics
where for "graphics" i intend some combination of texture, polygons, effect etc quality.
In my opinion PC customization is present to be able to run the game on a wide range of PCs, not because some people like 720/60 more than 1080/30. In the case of consoles, they have only one target hardware.
I disagree, people is not the same, when i was a pc gamer i liked to try various combinations of settings, not just the "best" one(what's be the best one? The one that looks better? The one that runs better?)
7DollarHagane
Banned
Yep and some people are willing to sacrifice visual fidelity for framerate on PC. Only difference is the developer is doing that for you on PC.
No, let's not do that.
Like it or not, framerate and resolution can be and often are design decisions. If Evolution or Playground want us to experience their games with amazing graphics at 1080p instead of decent graphics at 60fps, then they should be allowed to make that decision and not have to cater to a vocal minority that is completely obsessed with 60fps/1080p or either of those.
If you think The Last of Us would have been a better game if they had spent time, effort and money in optimizing a second version of the game that would have been far uglier but ran at 60 fps, you should not be catered to. If you think The Order 1886 should give you the option to remove the black bars because you can't stand the fact that it isn't 'full true 1080p', you should not be catered to. If you think they should give Call of Duty better graphics while lowering the framerate to 30fps, you should not be catered to.
Consoles are great because developers can simply make a single version of their game perfectly optimized for that system. Doing that, they can make decisions on how the game can be best optimized to deliver the experience that they want to deliver.
I'm ok with there being options for locking the framerate at 30 for a game that runs in between 30 and 40. I'm not ok with demanding options to turn a 30fps/720p game into a 60fps/1080p game at the cost of visual effects or the other way around, since that would mean forcing the developer to optimize different versions of their game just to cater to a vocal internet minority instead of actually making and optimizing a version of the game based on how they want you to experience it.
I'm not going to demand a painter to make multiple versions of a painting with different paint or different styles just because I don't like the paint he uses and want more options. He's the painter; he should paint what he wants to paint with the paint he wants to use and in whatever style he feels is best suited.
Like it or not, framerate and resolution can be and often are design decisions. If Evolution or Playground want us to experience their games with amazing graphics at 1080p instead of decent graphics at 60fps, then they should be allowed to make that decision and not have to cater to a vocal minority that is completely obsessed with 60fps/1080p or either of those.
If you think The Last of Us would have been a better game if they had spent time, effort and money in optimizing a second version of the game that would have been far uglier but ran at 60 fps, you should not be catered to. If you think The Order 1886 should give you the option to remove the black bars because you can't stand the fact that it isn't 'full true 1080p', you should not be catered to. If you think they should give Call of Duty better graphics while lowering the framerate to 30fps, you should not be catered to.
Consoles are great because developers can simply make a single version of their game perfectly optimized for that system. Doing that, they can make decisions on how the game can be best optimized to deliver the experience that they want to deliver.
I'm ok with there being options for locking the framerate at 30 for a game that runs in between 30 and 40. I'm not ok with demanding options to turn a 30fps/720p game into a 60fps/1080p game at the cost of visual effects or the other way around, since that would mean forcing the developer to optimize different versions of their game just to cater to a vocal internet minority instead of actually making and optimizing a version of the game based on how they want you to experience it.
I'm not going to demand a painter to make multiple versions of a painting with different paint or different styles just because I don't like the paint he uses and want more options. He's the painter; he should paint what he wants to paint with the paint he wants to use and in whatever style he feels is best suited.
RPGCrazied
Member
At least add a vsync option. I'd gladly take sub 20's fps for no tearing. That is my most hated thing from a game technically.
I think the one that delivers stable framerate with best visuals as possible. For framerate I trust the dev that they know what is required for best experience. (Like Tiemen said too above)
Breakfast at Noon
Member
If a 30fps game is changed too 60 does that not fuck up other things like animation?
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
No, just no.
This is a terrible idea on so many levwls.
This is a terrible idea on so many levwls.
Guys, it's not like they are going to retrofit a 30fps game to 60. They will design the game around 60fps, and have people run at 30fps at higher res.
SneakyStephan
Banned
No, it's a bandaid for a problem that shouldn't exist
On a closed platform there is no excuse for a game not being 60 fps and native res, the whole point of fixed hardware is that you can design the entire game around a specific framerate.
One of the advantages of a closed box like a console USED to be that you get really consistent performance in games designed for it (e.g no tearing, no big fps drops)
used to be
On a closed platform there is no excuse for a game not being 60 fps and native res, the whole point of fixed hardware is that you can design the entire game around a specific framerate.
One of the advantages of a closed box like a console USED to be that you get really consistent performance in games designed for it (e.g no tearing, no big fps drops)
used to be
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
This
Freeman
Banned
No. Locking to 30fps makes sense if the game has variable FPS, other big changes would serve no purpose and would take away the biggest advantage consoles have.
If you can't handle 30fps and the occasional bellow 1080p res, just get a PC and stop complaining, this is out of control. Put your money where your mouth is.
If you can't handle 30fps and the occasional bellow 1080p res, just get a PC and stop complaining, this is out of control. Put your money where your mouth is.
To be fair, if they could LOCK 30fps then a lot of people wouldn't be that bothered i'm sure. The problem is that we are used to 30fps console games where in reality they are more like 20-30fps with drops sometimes into the teens and it gives people the impression that '30fps' is not very smooth but anyone who has played a 'locked 30fps' game like Forza Horizon for example, they know how very smooth a locked 30fps can be.
If developers aimed for LOCKED 30fps in future games then i think would be a great start.
If developers aimed for LOCKED 30fps in future games then i think would be a great start.
Lord_Balkan
Member
Sure, but some people don't exactly care about maximizing the hardware. They can maximize the hardware in the "Quality" preset, and just have a "Preformance" Preset for the people that would rather have the game play better than better graphics.
Beermeister
Banned
No!
Haunted
Member
There are a ton of Unity games that already have really vague and nondescript graphical fidelity options ranging from "Fastest" to "Fantastic".
I think that'd be fine for console people who don't really understand graphical techniques or details yet still gives them a degree of control over image quality vs performance.
edit: I actually don't know if that even does anything for these Unity games, I just put everything on fantastic and 1080p all the time anyway.
I think that'd be fine for console people who don't really understand graphical techniques or details yet still gives them a degree of control over image quality vs performance.
edit: I actually don't know if that even does anything for these Unity games, I just put everything on fantastic and 1080p all the time anyway.
Gipsy Danger
Member
TIL PC games are poorly designed.
Parhelion69
Member
PC gamer population has a broad range of different configurations, so the freedom of choice of settings is a necessity, not a luxury. Sadly, you can't have the best experience the game can offer (visually) if you don't have a great system, so you can tone down those graphical settings in order to have a pleasant experience.
Consoles, are a closed system, so the developer knows exactly how the game will end, and the experience will be the same for everyone.
Developers have a vision of the game, and they do the best tradeoffs to reach that goal. If they give such options I see two problems:
-Their vision of the game can be altered
-It involves more development and specially, testing time (and thus, money)
So they would spend resources in something that isn't really needed (which would please only a infinitesimal part of the gaming population).
I say they better spend their resources in making the game better.
If I want to play with options, I'll just get it on PC.
Consoles, are a closed system, so the developer knows exactly how the game will end, and the experience will be the same for everyone.
Developers have a vision of the game, and they do the best tradeoffs to reach that goal. If they give such options I see two problems:
-Their vision of the game can be altered
-It involves more development and specially, testing time (and thus, money)
So they would spend resources in something that isn't really needed (which would please only a infinitesimal part of the gaming population).
I say they better spend their resources in making the game better.
If I want to play with options, I'll just get it on PC.
There's a history of hidden 60fps modes in console games, with limited features.
Here's a few examples plucked from this list of 60fps console games.
I would appreciate a "high detail" vs "smooth video update" option in many games, but not all. I wouldn't expect Mario Kart to let me drop the frame rate, for example.
Here's a few examples plucked from this list of 60fps console games.
I would appreciate a "high detail" vs "smooth video update" option in many games, but not all. I wouldn't expect Mario Kart to let me drop the frame rate, for example.
Correct. No thank you! Not to mention it would wreak havoc with multiplayer and increase bugs to be fixed.
Consoles are communism at its best. Everybody gets the same damn thing, and we're all better for it.
Pyramid head
Banned
Didn't Two Worlds 2 on the PS3 have a 'debug' menu you could access which let you play with a buch of graphics sliders?
Gipsy Danger
Member
30fps on racing games is better now is it?
LordOfChaos
Member
Did you stop reading my comment halfway through? Some options would be easy, I just meant more advanced ones like texture settings. AA, resolution, locked vs unlocked, those would indeed not take long.
Jeronimo Jones
Member
Wouldn't troubleshooting and finalizing multiple settings also delay development and introduce more headaches/bugs? Nah, I'm good on that.
sickvisionz
Banned
I wouldn't mind a simple slider that was "Graphics" on the right and "Performance" on the left and you could slide it up or down depending on what you were happy with. So many multiplats are on the PC so it's not like these devs have zero knowledge or ability to make a title with varying degrees of graphic performance in them.
Hell, I'd be satisfied if it was simply that the game could tell if you had set your console to 720p or 1080p and would make adjustments based off of that.
Hell, I'd be satisfied if it was simply that the game could tell if you had set your console to 720p or 1080p and would make adjustments based off of that.
I'll read the thread so but right now I'm just getting my foot in the door since I have to go out the door in a couple of minutes.
I refuse to deal with the bullshit the likes of Bioshock Infinite on PS3 ever again. I refuse to be forced to choose between good Image Quality, and good Framerate. Here's this little box that gives you 30fps and no screen tearing or 55fps and screen tearing up the goddamn wazoo. No. No. No. No. I buy consoles because of their singular experiences. The way I play a game is the exact way someone else played the same game. That goes for single player. For multiplayer, I am extraordinarily uncomfortable with anyone having any modicum of an advantage over me because their graphic settings are different. If I want to start turning off graphic effects for framerate, I'd go buy/keep playing on my PC. No.
I refuse to deal with the bullshit the likes of Bioshock Infinite on PS3 ever again. I refuse to be forced to choose between good Image Quality, and good Framerate. Here's this little box that gives you 30fps and no screen tearing or 55fps and screen tearing up the goddamn wazoo. No. No. No. No. I buy consoles because of their singular experiences. The way I play a game is the exact way someone else played the same game. That goes for single player. For multiplayer, I am extraordinarily uncomfortable with anyone having any modicum of an advantage over me because their graphic settings are different. If I want to start turning off graphic effects for framerate, I'd go buy/keep playing on my PC. No.