Where the Hell is gaming going?

[BabyTyrant]

Saw an Article where a Developer had said something along the lines of "expect mostly 30FPS games going forward"

And I'm just Baffled on Why?

Like, because some "Smoothbrain" thinks everyone wants 8K Resolution forced on us?

I sure as Hell don't, and I'm already extremely tired of many games just being developed to hit 4K/60FPS, without the option of Lowering Resolution in exchange for higher FPS.

60FPS by itself can be fine for a Lot of games, but I feel like 30FPS just ain't enough.

Unless you strictly play like 2D Platformers (like classic Mario Bros games), I feel like 30FPS is unacceptable.

It's just plain Laziness to not at least give people options.

It's simple enough for PC to allow you to drop Resolution if you wanna Prioritize FPS.

Should be the same for Console gaming.

 

[KitsuneFox]

I have never owned a "good"' computer for games ... a lot of what I play is under 20 FPS ... sometimes less than 10.
I do not understand some folks who demand extremely high framerate games.

 

[BabyTyrant]

I have never owned a "good"' computer for games ... a lot of what I play is under 20 FPS ... sometimes less than 10.
I do not understand some folks who demand extremely high framerate games.

It's one of those things, that once you get past 60FPS, you don't wanna go back to 30.

I can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60-100+ FPS in smoothness of the Animation.

Fast paced Gaming looks like utter Crap if limited to like 30FPS.

 

[LaLoneDigi]

I love 60 fps being the gold standard, but I don't mind the occasional 30 fps on console games if they are truly pushing the boundaries of what the system can do. Specifically if it's a CPU bottleneck. If a game is doing a bunch of interactive simulations that are pushing the CPU in new ways, lowering the resolution of the game won't help. The recent Zelda game is 30 FPS, and it's justified. Starfield somehow keeps track of objects with physical properties and interactions across 1000's of worlds. I'm not surprised that's 30 FPS.

We're also finally seeing more console developers adding performance modes (something I've been asking for since the PS3 generation...), and I think that's been great.

Games like Red Fall on the other hand are just examples of publishers being stupid. There is no reason for that game to be stuck at an inconsistent 30 fps. That's not the fault of the hardware. They cannot justify that game's poor performance.

Anyway, I hope most developers prioritize at least 60, but if they are aiming for 30, then they better be doing something special to justify it.

 

[BabyTyrant]

I love 60 fps being the gold standard, but I don't mind the occasional 30 fps on console games if they are truly pushing the boundaries of what the system can do. Specifically if it's a CPU bottleneck. If a game is doing a bunch of interactive simulations that are pushing the CPU in new ways, lowering the resolution of the game won't help. The recent Zelda game is 30 FPS, and it's justified. Starfield somehow keeps track of objects with physical properties and interactions across 1000's of worlds. I'm not surprised that's 30 FPS.

We're also finally seeing more console developers adding performance modes (something I've been asking for since the PS3 generation...), and I think that's been great.

Games like Red Fall on the other hand are just examples of publishers being stupid. There is no reason for that game to be stuck at an inconsistent 30 fps. That's not the fault of the hardware. They cannot justify that game's poor performance.

Anyway, I hope most developers prioritize at least 60, but if they are aiming for 30, then they better be doing something special to justify it.

Well, I'd expect a Maximum of 60FPS on a Switch title anyways, or 30FPS if they are trying to "push the Envelope"

And idk that any Developer is really doing enough to limit games to 30FPS.

I just know the PS5 and Xbox Series X are way more than capable of running almost anything at 4K/60 Minimum, and 1440P/120 should be possible on probably 75% or more Titles.

 

[LaLoneDigi]

Well, I'd expect a Maximum of 60FPS on a Switch title anyways, or 30FPS if they are trying to "push the Envelope"

And idk that any Developer is really doing enough to limit games to 30FPS.

I just know the PS5 and Xbox Series X are way more than capable of running almost anything at 4K/60 Minimum, and 1440P/120 should be possible on probably 75% or more Titles.

I do agree that many developers/publishers are missing the mark. We can see from PC ports how poorly optimized some of these games are. We can look at how games are utilizing CPU cores, and how inefficient they are.

There are growing pains in the industry right now. I think things will get better as this console generation continues. Too many games have been targeting last gen hardware as well as current gen, so developers have less resources to optimize. As more and more games ditch last gen, and people get used to Unreal 5, we will start seeing more consistent frame rates again. I hope...

 

[BunBunDojo]

So many games that are out now are obsessed with the latest and greatest hyperrealisticness, but it is important to remember that the reason a lot of us play games is to escape reality. When there is no more fantasy involved and it becomes to real is tough, as well as the cost of having to keep up to date with more and more equipment required to run such games.

Honestly I just like me a little bit of super mario world and animal crossing new leaf.

 

[PinkAndLittle]

I much prefer higher framrates over 4k and above. Anyway thing below 60 and I get headaches. I can not watch my roommate play certain games on her consoles. Getting used to higher frames have ruined consoles for me.

 

[ShippoFox]

I don't even care if graphics get much better. I'd prefer games not balloon to an eventual 500gb a piece and I'd like it if they focused more on gameplay. But I think it's reasonable to expect most games be 60fps. i dunno why they are abandoning it in favor of super high resolutions. I still play at like 1080p

 

[BabyTyrant]

I don't even care if graphics get much better. I'd prefer games not balloon to an eventual 500gb a piece and I'd like it if they focused more on gameplay. But I think it's reasonable to expect most games be 60fps. i dunno why they are abandoning it in favor of super high resolutions. I still play at like 1080p

Yeah, it's already Absurd that many games get to be 75+gb in size, especially coupled with the relatively high cost of "Current Gen Storage" for the PS5 and Series X (2TB SSD can still cost $200+, whereas a 4TB HD might be under $80).

I think it's something about trying to make Marketing as Simple as Possible, so even the most Unintelligent "Gamer" can understand that X > Y (where X is the bigger number, because even Idiots can understand this level of Math).

Clearly the Studios seem to think 4K/60 is enough to Satisfy most Gamers

4K is fine, but I'd easily trade Resolution for more FPS and more reliable (Stable) performance.

I think a nice Practical limit for most games would be 100-120FPS.

Anywhere around there I find has a fluid enough motion to Satisfy me.

 

[PinkAndLittle]

Not to mention that console games still use render upscaling (sometimes built into tv's) or use lower graphical settings compared to pc counterparts just to say their game runs at 4k. So most of the time it's not true native 4k or the exact same fidelity that you can get on pc

 

[CrazySmoker]

Simply answer to first post: You'd be forced to buy modern PC.