Support NeoGAF

[-tetsuo-]

The answer will never be yes.

 

[potatohead]

Single player maybe. Multiplayer will still be 30fps for games that aren't running at 60 on the OG ps4

That's not how multiplayer works.

 

[JimJamJones]

Jesus....yes and 144hz displays are just witchcraft.....

You really see no difference between 60 FPS and 30 FPS?

 

[Nzyme32]

No.

1) The CPU does not have enough oomph to bring 30hz targeted games up to 60hzin a reliable manner.

2) There are no imposed standards about framerates on consoles, espeically 60hz, if you look at the output of this generation, the last, and the one before it even.

3) Sony will apparently not allow multiplayer games with different performance profiles in general for some reason (i.e. one version targetting 30hz and the other targetting 60hz).

Slightly relevant: I see no reason though why Sony should disallow games that are already unlcoked framerates up to 60hz to run better on PS4pro.

On point, but also the continuing chase for increased fidelity that can be marketed against competition is given priority, even now.

 

[dogen]

Per core performance of current gen consoles is weaker than per core performance of last gen consoles.

not really..

jaguar is a lot faster at running most code.

 

[supernormal]

Every damn new hardware.

fps or res won't ever be standard, just because you'll always find devs who prefer pushing other aspects.

I think this should actually come engraved on the actual consoles themselves to see if people get the idea of "standard" anything out of their head.

 

[fizzwizz]

Developers could have made 1080p/60fps a standard on the 360 and PS3 if they wanted to.

When will people realise that it's not about the hardware, it's about developer ambition and priorities.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

No, it has nothing to do with hardware.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

The answer will still be no in 20 years after many more new pieces of hardware.

 

[icespide]

60fps has nothing to do with hardware

 

[VariantX]

No. It might make steady frame rates standard in games with unlocked framerates. It would get me to play killzone again if i didn't have to deal with wildly fluctuating framerates on top of tiny FOV.

 

[xxracerxx]

The answer will still be no in 20 years after many more new pieces of hardware.

This

 

[fizzwizz]

That's not how multiplayer works.

Sony have said that's exactly how it will work.

 

[King_Moc]

Not on any game that is processor limited, no.

 

[Astral Dog]

60fps will unfortunately never be a standard.

The industry seems focused on 30fps, the fact that the new consoles are pushing 4k30fps says it all.

I don't doubt that we'll see single player games receive patches that increase the framerate, but don't expect a sudden surge of focus on 60fps games.

To be honest we could have 60fps games today, but image quality and graphical effects are a priority.



I don't agree with that at all. Today's consoles are more than capable of 60fps, but it would mean toning down the way certain games look. There's no incentive for developers to do that as the majority of consumers are not concerned with having 60fps.

Obviously the PS4 is not capable of Uncharted 4 campaign at 60fps, otherwise it would have been 60fps. But Naughty Dog could quite easily have made the game look worse (like in multiplayer) to hit that target.

To be honest I'd be happy with all games needing to hit 60fps, as I believe games could still look good while hitting that target, maybe not as good as some titles do given the hardware but good enough for me.

you are talking like it doesnt matter, of course the design is important in achieving 60fps on consoles, but you can always use the extra GPU power for something else like resolution and effects.

there was a noticeable difference on both framerate and iq on PS4 and will continue with the pro, but no machine is perfect for 60fps unless the developers design for it.
And the CPU is definetly a big part of that design

 

[johnnydrama]

Based Jaguar, m8.

 

[Raiden]

Eh 60 is overrated. Im fine with anything +40. Why does it have to be one or the other? Nobody can tell the difference between 50 or 60 anyway.

 

[Dio]

There have been 60fps games for decades already. When they move things to 8k, quite a lot of games will still be 30fps.

 

[King_Moc]

Eh 60 is overrated. Im fine with anything +40. Why does it have to be one or the other? Nobody can tell the difference between 50 or 60 anyway.

40-50 will give you screen tearing and stutter. That's why people asked for 30fps locked modes on Killzone and Infamous. The framerate needs to be divisible by the HZ rating of the screen.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

60fps is not going to be standard any time, regardless of hardware and resolution.

Devs making single player campaigns like Uncharted, Tomb Raider, Assassins Creed etc will always value 30 fps eye candy over 60fps. A pretty looking game advertises itself, responsiveness isn't as 'sexy', for want of a better word.

 

[Metfanant]

At some point people will understand that regardless of processing power, 60fps will never be standard for all games, unless somebody like Sony or MS requires it for certification (and that's never happening)

There will ALWAYS be devs that want to push the envelope visually, and will therefore go for 30fps

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Unfortunately it looks like we're jumping to 4K before we achieve 1080/60. I guess 4K and HDR are better for marketing than 60fps

 

[mieumieu]

as a pc gamer, playing every game (af least every new game... ports of older games sometimes suffer from locked framerate) at 60 is not a luxury. so I would rather all developers target 60fps on consoles even when it will cut back some effects or dynamics.

 

[TheJollyCorner]

The human eye can't really see anything over 30fps anyway.

God bless you, Neuro. God bless you.

 

[HTupolev]

Eh 60 is overrated. Im fine with anything +40. Why does it have to be one or the other?

Because the TV signals are cycling at 60Hz. 50fps with vsync means that every fifth frame is going to be 33ms long instead of 16ms, which will cause visible judder; 50fps without vsync means tons of screen tearing.

Nobody can tell the difference between 50 or 60 anyway.

With gsync/freesync, the difference between 50fps and 60fps is fairly subtle. But on a TV screen, it's quite obvious.

Remember the "59fps" controversy with Mario Kart 8 in modes with AI? That wasn't a joke. Having one 33ms frame each second had an impact on fluidity for some people, it was one of those annoying things that cannot be unseen.

 

[Inuhanyou]

as a pc gamer, playing every game (af least every new game... ports of older games sometimes suffer from locked framerate) at 60 is not a luxury. so I would rather all developers target 60fps on consoles even when it will cut back some effects or dynamics.

60fps doesn't work like that. You don't just tone down some graphics sliders and get automatic 60fps

 

[Applecot]

It's unclear what kind of benefit will even come to 1080p systems if at all

 

[nextgeneration]

60 fps will never be a standard unless the console manufacturers mandate that all games run at 60 fps on their respective systems, which will probably never happen.

 

[reckless]

Never going to happen, a 1080/30 game is going to look a lot better then a 1080/60 game and graphics sell, not frame rates (for most people).

Hardware doesn't matter.

 

[firelogic]

Horizon on Pro is BEAUTIFUL. That's all I had to say. Buying a Pro for Horizon.

 

[Rival]

I fear Playing these games running at 4K 30fps is going to feel like watching a slideshow.

 

[Gaius]

I never understood why 60fps can't be standard. Even if some developers prefer pushing visuals, wouldn't 60fps across the whole platform level the playing field? If you're a dev that wants to push visuals you can still easily do that by making your game a certain way (more linear than open), having good aesthetics or just using a better technique than a competing studio. No studio would refuse to abandon 40ml+ users just because sony would mandate 60fps. Every player would benefit from that.

 

[Renekton]

I never understood why 60fps can't be standard. Even if some developers prefer pushing visuals, wouldn't 60fps across the whole platform level the playing field? If you're a dev that wants to push visuals you can still easily do that by making your game a certain way (more linear than open), having good aesthetics or just using a better technique than a competing studio. No studio would refuse to abandon 40ml+ users just because sony would mandate 60fps. Every player would benefit from that.

CPU limited.

Very difficult to push 60fps on weak Jaguars.

 

[Gaius]

CPU limited.

Very difficult to push 60fps on weak Jaguars.

Yeah i know for pspro it's not possible, was speaking more in general future sense.

 

[Toparaman]

Look at the Phantom Pain and Doom, which are arguably two of the best-looking games (in motion, not in still screens) on PS4, and run at a locked 60fps pretty much all the time.

You can nitpick about how those games don't have X graphical effect or Y level of polygonal density unlike Uncharted 4 or The Order or Infamous SS or what have you, but I'd venture most gamers would say Phantom Pain and Doom are excellent-looking games (again, in motion, not in screenshots) that compare favorably to the aforementioned titles.

I hope many games allow a 60fps option for Pro owners, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[potatohead]

Sony have said that's exactly how it will work.

That's what they want it to be, but it doesn't mean it will be like that always.

Multiplayer data is still never necessarily tied to framerate.

 

[Dio]

Look at the Phantom Pain and Doom, which are arguably two of the best-looking games (in motion, not in still screens) on PS4, and run at a locked 60fps pretty much all the time.

You can nitpick about how those games don't have X graphical effect or Y level of polygonal density unlike Uncharted 4 or The Order or Infamous SS or what have you, but I'd venture most gamers would say Phantom Pain and Doom are excellent-looking games (again, in motion, not in screenshots) that compare favorably to the aforementioned titles.

I hope many games allow a 60fps option for Pro owners, but I'm not holding my breath.

That's the thing. Screenshots make for better advertisement than 'it looks good in motion.'

 

[Linkyn]

No, I don't think it's technologically feasible on a PS4 Pro for all games, and even if it were, the focus simply isn't there, which is quite a shame to say the least. One thing that makes me cautiously optimistic about the incremental updates is that it forces developers to adopt a more flexible stance on settings for console games. Ideally, we'll see more games offer a choice between higher resolution and better performance (à la RotTR). I absolutely recognise the visual boost resolutions beyond 1080p can give (even though I don't have the display for it), but resolution has never been a priority for me, and when in doubt, it's one of the first things I sacrifice in order to stabilise frame rates on PC.

 

[AfroDust]

No, and I can't wait till the day where GAF finally stops whining about it.

 

[Metfanant]

CPU limited.

Very difficult to push 60fps on weak Jaguars.

No it's not...you could push 60fps on any CPU you want...

Games being 60fps on the PS4 (or Xbone for that matter) have ZERO to do with Jaguar CPU cores

 

[Tenshin]

solid 30fps , i dont think it could make every 30fps games to 60fps

 

[Pachinko]

Simply put - no - running todays best looking games in the highest detail settings at 60 fps requires at minimum ,what the Scorpio will offer. So titles like Witcher 3 and Rise of the Tomb Raider are definite no goes there.

I'd be willing to bet some of the titles with unlocked framerates from earlier in the PS4's life could hold 60 fps FAR more often though - namely Infamous second son. I think we could see that locked, instead of constant dips down to 30 you might see a few dips down to 50 during the most heated portions of the game.

Same deal with Killzone shadowfall (which was a pretty poor game btw) , the PRO could probably push that game up to a stable 60 (it wouldn't be locked , just nearly locked).

I think it's far more likely going forward that new games will simply follow some PC style graphics settings going forward -

XB1- 900p 30 fps PC equivalent Medium/High presets
PS4 - 1080p 30 fps PC equivalent High presets
PS4pro - 1080p 30 fps PC equivalent Ultra/very High presets
PS4pro - 4K 30 fps PC equivalent medium/interpolated "fake" 4K
Scorpio - 1080p 60 fps PC equivalent Ultra/very High (just barely)
Scorpio - 4K 30 fps PC equivalent Medium/high REAL 4K. (and a little choppy)

 

[OCD Guy]

you are talking like it doesnt matter, of course the design is important in achieving 60fps on consoles, but you can always use the extra GPU power for something else like resolution and effects.

there was a noticeable difference on both framerate and iq on PS4 and will continue with the pro, but no machine is perfect for 60fps unless the developers design for it.
And the CPU is definetly a big part of that design

CPU limited.

Very difficult to push 60fps on weak Jaguars.

I disagree again. I'm not saying that the cpu isn't weak on the current consoles, it is, and I'm not saying that cpu plays no part in framerate, it does.

However some developers choose to work to a 30fps target, this allows them freedom to do certain things, things that they might not be able to do given the current hardware if they were working to 60fps.

But the current consoles are more than capable of 60fps games, but if there was such a mandate on the Playstation the games we get would not look as good, and perhaps be more linear.

Take driveclub for example, Evolution could have got that game running at 60fps, in order to do that they would have had to scale back certain things, which would have resulted in an inferior looking game, but I'd be ok with that.

I'm actually happy with how games like Doom, Call of Duty, Dirt Rally, Gravity Rush Remastered, God of War 3 remastered, Last of Us remastered, Borderlands Handsome collection, Metal Gear Solid V etc look. They're all 60fps games.

Take a look at Uncharted 4 also, multiplayer doesn't look as good as the campaign right? They had to make cutbacks to achieve that 60fps in multiplayer right? Well I'd have been ok with the campaign looking like the multiplayer if it meant we got 60fps.

 

[eifer]

Honestly, 30fps gives me a headache, and sitting at a computer desk is what I'm already doing all day at work. Why can't I just have 1080p 60fps on a console? Shit, give me the option between 1080p 30fps and 720p 60fps and I'll go for the 720p. And no, I don't really want to hook up my PC in the living room...

 

[ScientificPizza]

No.

This is the exact same thing everyone expected at the start of this generation. We will probably never get there universally.

 

[Sota4077]

60fps is never going to be a standard.

I wouldn't say NEVER. Just not in the near future. There will likely be a time when technologies make 4K far more affordable and 60 FPS may become commonplace.

 

[Forever Changes]

No it's not...you could push 60fps on any CPU you want...

Games being 60fps on the PS4 (or Xbone for that matter) have ZERO to do with Jaguar CPU cores

I'd say they have some part. Would have to sacrifice A LOT to push for 60 with those terrible notebook CPU's

 

[Sota4077]

I fear Playing these games running at 4K 30fps is going to feel like watching a slideshow.

What?...if it is running at 30FPS is will be identical to thousands of games currently. Either you worded that poorly or you have a lacking understanding of FPS. Do you mean the consoles cannot maintain 30FPS at 4K?

 

[Dio]

I wouldn't say NEVER. Just not in the near future. There will likely be a time when technologies make 4K far more affordable and 60 FPS may become commonplace.

8k is on the horizon. They're just going to make things 8k30.

 

[OCD Guy]

? Shit, give me the option between 1080p 30fps and 720p 60fps and I'll go for the 720p. And no, I don't really want to hook up my PC in the living room...

While the reality of 60fps as a standard is nowhere in sight, I think what is likely is console games becoming like pc in terms of flexibility with settings.

These new consoles are going to set a new standard, while initially it will be basic options as opposed to being able to tweak each individual graphical setting, I could potentially see it evolving until it just basically becomes like pc gaming.

I know some would argue that it would just be another step in making consoles less accessible, but there would be nothing stopping games defaulting to "optimum" settings, and anyone that wanted to change settings would have the choice there.

What I've just said might not happen, but I think there's more chance of that happening than 60fps being mandated by Sony and Microsoft.