Average pc users. THings are a lot different once you start going up there and ask people what there res is vs there fps. This is a useless comment I don't care about others pc performance only my own and I'm solid in that area especially if I stay just above 720p.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
John Carmack: "Many next-gen games will still target 30 fps"
- Thread starter alexandros
- Start date
Average pc users. THings are a lot different once you start going up there and ask people what there res is vs there fps. This is a useless comment I don't care about others pc performance only my own and I'm solid in that area especially if I stay just above 720p.
cobragt4001
Banned
*hugs gtx670 sli*
I actually moved from the ps3 to pc and I must say anyone saying there's no difference in 30fps and 60fps is crazy. After playing BF3 and metro on pc for a month and finally going back to the ps3 to see the comparison it was impossible for me to even play on the ps3 because of the low quality. BF3 on the ps3 is horrible and I honestly don't think it runs at even 24fps because I locked my framerate to 30fps in BF3 on my pc and it ran so much more smoother than the ps3.
I actually moved from the ps3 to pc and I must say anyone saying there's no difference in 30fps and 60fps is crazy. After playing BF3 and metro on pc for a month and finally going back to the ps3 to see the comparison it was impossible for me to even play on the ps3 because of the low quality. BF3 on the ps3 is horrible and I honestly don't think it runs at even 24fps because I locked my framerate to 30fps in BF3 on my pc and it ran so much more smoother than the ps3.
im just pointing out the usual commentary on how ALL pc users are seemingly able to play games at max settings.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I remember being in a nearly full transport chopper when the pilot bailed out for no reason, leaving us all to die in a fiery wreck. Anyway, I wouldn't even wish console BF3 on that guy. What a travesty of an experience. DICE got the shooting mechanics right this time but you can't really appreciate it if the framerate is low.
Nizz
Member
I really hope devs nail their framerates down next gen. I do wish at least some genres like FPS and racing games to gun for 60fps all the time. Adventure style games like Uncharted I think would be fine at 30. At 60? sure it would be better.
But man I hope 30fps games next gen truly are 30fps with no dips. All these late gen 25fps running games are a bit disappointing...
KojiKnight
Member
Undoubtedly true, but it DOES bother me and undoubtedly there are also a lot of people like me
"But 12fps is fine for a competitive MP game on consoles!"
-Dice
Framerate is tied to playability. Smoother games are easier to control and a higher framerate decreases peripheral latency (video latency).
I'd rather have playability over visuals.
That depends on the game. For games like FPS I'm sure fidelity matters to a lot of people. Those people who usually play non-FPS, however, not many people give a damn.
True, but 30 has been pretty playable for me on my HDTV. Hell, I can even enable the 120Hz motion interpolation and still beat people on Live. Maybe they're 120Hz-ing, too. lol
Just make the 30 stable, that's all I ask. None of that Crysis 2 chugging. And no screen-tearing. Ugh.
somuchwater
Member
Except that the real world involves making compromises - hence decent console graphics at ~30fps. It's not like Ubisoft etc. are just lazy; they make specific choices about content, playability, marketing etc. and then go from there.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Seems a worthy goal.
Higher framerate also gives you higher temporal resolution, so it does result in better visuals.
Felix Lighter
Member
I think some people are arguing that they are making the wrong compromises (I agree in many cases). One of the best, if not the best selling franchise of the generation aims for 60 fps. It could very well be a contributing factor in its success.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Of course. Bullshots.
How MGS3 really looks:
How Ninja Gaiden really looks:
MGS3 on PS2 was sub 480i @ 30fps
Ninja Gaiden Black was 480p with 16:9 @ 60fps.
Even without factoring in bullshots... Ninja Gaiden still came out on top visually.
Can't tell if serious.
Randolph Freelander
Member
But how many funs per second will they target? Clearly, that is a far more important metric.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I'm so picky about framerates I only run BF3 on a CRT because 60fps on an LCD isn't good enough anymore. Also, vsync lag is horrifying.
The bottom facts are serious.
Excuse this pics, but we didn't have Digital Foundry type PNG shots back then for the masses.
KojiKnight
Member
Just remember... they probably targeted no less than 30FPS this generation... That figure can always (and will) be pushed back continually... Better to force their hands to 60 now and let them drop to 30 than let them start at 60 and push back to 20fps or lower.
Even something like the 8800gt can generally get much higher FPS out of games than you'd get on a console especially if you sacrifice AA, spending $150 - $200 on a video card is usually enough to ensure a curbstomp, maybe even just $100 now.
I do understand that spending that much may not be desirable though, but it does mean a path to 60 fps for multiplatform games usually exists. At the same it's why I want 60 fps to be a target with a stable 30 accepted if 60 is impractical as going below 30 most of the time goes past the line for me.
It matters to more genres than FPS, it actually matters a lot less for them than stuff like fighters, racers, and many faster paced action games. It's not necessary in all, no, but I'll probably appreciate 60 fps more than a few extra effects, but that's more critical when the flashy stuff puts in under 30 without ambitious gameplay to go with it, contrast Crysis 2 and SotC.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
... in 4 years after new consoles are released.
CitizenCope
Member
Guess I'll continue to play COD and skip Battlefield.
Zyrusticae
Banned
I don't get why people think this.
The new consoles are not going to release with the GPU equivalent of a GTX 680, and even direct-to-metal programming isn't going to make such a huge difference that PCs with such cards will find themselves struggling on next-gen games.
Also, some of us run two such powerful cards (like myself). No console can match that.
dragonelite
Member
If you have a pc you don't want to run it at console settings
.I want it to run 60 fps on high or ultra settings not some mixed and match medium to low setting.
alexandros
Banned
Sorry, fixed!
That's not what I'm saying, I myself have a PC that can't even be called mid-range anymore (old Intel quad-core, Radeon 6850, 4GB RAM). With PC gaming you have choices, which means that you can tailor your experience to suit your personal preference. Turn down eye candy for a faster framerate, increase settings at the cost of framerate, or buy better hardware and have both.
If you're maxing out current, modern games now, you already have a gaming PC that's more powerful than any of the 8th gen consoles. Yes, even Microsoft's.
RedAssedApe
Banned
COD to the rescue. Buttery smoothness.
Sentenza
Member
Nope, that never happens.
If anything, even just because the mystical "console optimization" many on GAF seem so fond of doesn't play a significant role in the early days of new console cycles.
And when it starts to have a significant impact, two or three years later... Well, PC hardware has already moved on.
Remember Last Gen:
30fps
60fps
Double the framerate. Double the graphics fidelity.
This gen has more than 4 times the number of pixels(in theory), so it's justified, next gen will have the same resolution, so there will be no loss caused by a bigger resolution.
1080p 60fps will not be the standard, but i'm sure that in the next gen we'll see it more often.
Ivan
Member
...and you have to buy it again, even if you had top of the line stuff at console launch. I had 6800, than 7800 gtx which was top when this generation started and many multiplatform games were unplayable. Then I upgraded to 8800 gtx - much better for a few years, but look how it plays today's multiplatform games. That's a lot of money for 99% of people, you can't ignore that and just say that hardware exists - you also have to buy it. It's not some theoretical comparison of what's possible. "Pc has that for xxx dollars TODAY" comment ignores a lot of money in between. And this is not a 3000$ pc bullshit.
ArchedThunder
Banned
Remember Last Gen:
30fps
60fps
Double the framerate. Double the graphics fidelity.
You are comparing a PS2 game to an Xbox game. You do realize the Xbox was much more powerful than the PS2, right?
PC games were more than capable of running at 60 fps at 1280x1024 resolution last gen with much weaker hardware than what's in the current consoles. The resolution itself isn't a bottleneck, it's the developers trying to do too much with too little which results in poor performance. I see no reason why that will change next gen.
plagiarize
Banned
eurgh. I am so glad that microstuttering isn't going to be coming to any console soon.I don't get why people think this.
The new consoles are not going to release with the GPU equivalent of a GTX 680, and even direct-to-metal programming isn't going to make such a huge difference that PCs with such cards will find themselves struggling on next-gen games.
Also, some of us run two such powerful cards (like myself). No console can match that.
Naked Snake
Member
Remember Tobal 2?
It is my earliest memory of repeatedly reading about the virtues of 60fps (I never got to play or even witness the game).
It is my earliest memory of repeatedly reading about the virtues of 60fps (I never got to play or even witness the game).
Alcoholikaust
Member
as an owner of an 680 sli setup-I shake my head at the thought of any PC gamer playing anything at "console quality" graphics. why even bother?
Remember Tobal 2?
It is my earliest memory of repeatedly reading about the virtues of 60fps (I never got to play or even witness the game).
I have Tobal 1. The animation in the first game is still some of the best I've ever seen in a fighter and showed how animation is more important than how a game looks in stills.
Wonko_C
Member
I have an aging PC, each newer console port requires a beefier PC than the last. What once ran Burnout Paradise 60fps flawlessly at maximum settings, now struggles to run Need For Speed Most Wanted at 30fps even.
I don't know why there isn't a website yet that documents console-equivalent settings for PC games, so users can copy them and build-up from there, that way they never get a "lower quality than console" experience and probably can even improve (if only a bit) over it.
While that is true... Creating a game like NG was no easy task. Especially when the Xbox had half of the transparency bandwidth of the PS2.
cobragt4001
Banned
Forget 60fps, in a couple of years it seems 120fps will be the standard. I'm quite happy with 60fps on my pc but I have seen 120fps and it's smoother. What I'm interested is when we will see monitors that do 2560x1600 but also with a refresh rate of 120hz, of course beefier gpus will be needed but imagine that!
cobragt4001
Banned
When I looked back at the console version it looked like a cellphone game or something. I really was ignorant of the major difference between the consoles and pc graphics and I can't see myself ever going back to consoles.
Not really a good comparison considering that hotputsuit and most wanted can run like crap for some regardless of power. If EA or certain companies bothered to optimize for pc more you would rarely see the fps issues you have.
Changing settings means dick in most wanted and tons of other people in the performance thread have bitched about it.
Sentenza
Member
Godspeed, Carmack.
Wasn't Doom 4 going to be 30fps? At least in single-player on consoles.
Maybe they pushed it to next gen and are pushing 60fps there.
angular graphics
Banned
As far as I can tell, he's talking about PC actually (and Doom 4 PC was always going to be 60).
He's expanding on his previous comment: "it isn't like all PC games run at a reliable, VSync'd 60 fps... 50 fps is usually worse than 30." => he didn't want it to be misinterpreted that they do not target 60 anymore, because they do => "For the record, just in case it wasn't clear, we continue to target 60fps[...]"
Sentenza
Member
...And?
Sorry, but I'm not sure how your reply is related to my post.