Quantcast
What are you willing to sacrifice for 60 FPS or higher?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What are you willing to sacrifice for 60 FPS or higher?

What do you prefer?

Framerate 139 62.05%
 
Resolution 48 21.43%
 
Other 37 16.52%
 
Total:224
caffeinade said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I'd be willing to use an emulator to achieve 60fps

God, I make such great sacrifices just for my beloved framerate

Someday I will be able to play BotW at 60FPS.

Isn't CEMU able to do that already?



Around the Network

Framerate > Resolution.



curl-6 said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:
The Switch is way too under powered which as the latest 2017 system out there should have no excuse for its lack of performance.

It's a handheld. That's not an excuse, it's simply a fact that it's not viable to squeeze PS4 levels of power into such a small case with today's technology.

 

Fine. Where is this generation's home system by Nintendo then?

Whether you answer: it's the Switch which then would validate my point or you say "there is no home system from Nintendo this gen", which is actually worse, the problem of a norm of 1080p 60fps games not being there, remains.



.

I'm in the zone, don't bother me!

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
caffeinade said:

Someday I will be able to play BotW at 60FPS.

Isn't CEMU able to do that already?

Not perfectly, yet.



CrazyGamer2017 said:
curl-6 said:

It's a handheld. That's not an excuse, it's simply a fact that it's not viable to squeeze PS4 levels of power into such a small case with today's technology.

Fine. Where is this generation's home system by Nintendo then?

Whether you answer, it's the Switch which then would validate my point or you say "there is no home system from Nintendo this gen", which is actually worse, the problem of a norm of 1080p 60fps games not being there, remains.

Nintendo are no longer making dedicated home consoles; there isn't room on the market for three similar consoles to do well, there never has been. On the other hand, making an alternative product, the Switch, is clearly paying off. Plenty of Switch games are 1080p60 actually, and given the success of titles like Zelda gamers don't seem to mind too much if a game doesn't hit an arbitrary pixel count.



Around the Network
curl-6 said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:

Fine. Where is this generation's home system by Nintendo then?

Whether you answer, it's the Switch which then would validate my point or you say "there is no home system from Nintendo this gen", which is actually worse, the problem of a norm of 1080p 60fps games not being there, remains.

Nintendo are no longer making dedicated home consoles; there isn't room on the market for three similar consoles to do well, there never has been. On the other hand, making an alternative product, the Switch, is clearly paying off. Plenty of Switch games are 1080p60 actually, and given the success of titles like Zelda gamers don't seem to mind too much if a game doesn't hit an arbitrary pixel count.

 

Well if the future of Nintendo is decided by people who lower their standards gen after gen then I fear that you might be right: There may never be a home system by that company again. Also the rest of the industry seems to steer towards norms (1080p, 4K, HDR, 60fps etc.) It seems strange to me that Nintendo is the only one that does not go that way. It's of course good news for the company as it means no need to invest money in advancing components and technology, just work on different concepts and voilà, people will flock to you. But as a consumer who wants a decent product, I am not too happy about this turn of events.

I'll cross fingers and hope one day to play BOTW on some future home system that will do justice to the new generations of televisions we see in the market today but if not then, I will have to send my divorce papers for Nintendo to sign.



.

I'm in the zone, don't bother me!

CrazyGamer2017 said:
curl-6 said:

Nintendo are no longer making dedicated home consoles; there isn't room on the market for three similar consoles to do well, there never has been. On the other hand, making an alternative product, the Switch, is clearly paying off. Plenty of Switch games are 1080p60 actually, and given the success of titles like Zelda gamers don't seem to mind too much if a game doesn't hit an arbitrary pixel count.

 

Well if the future of Nintendo is decided by people who lower their standards gen after gen then I fear that you might be right: There may never be a home system by that company again. Also the rest of the industry seems to steer towards norms (1080p, 4K, 60fps etc.) It seems strange to me that Nintendo is the only one that does not go that way. It's of course good news for the company as it means no need to invest money in advancing components and technology, just work on different concepts and voilà, people will flock to you. But as a consumer who wants a decent product, I am not too happy about this turn of events.

I'll cross fingers and hope one day to play BOTW on some future home system that will do justice to the new generations of televisions but if not then, I will have to send my divorce papers for Nintendo to sign them

Nintendo are keeping both the house and the kids; I hope you understand that.



Ideally, I would like a high resolution and 60 FPS. However, if that is not possible then my preference on which should be sacrificed will largely depend on the game in question. If the game has high speed motion or requires high precision movements (think of speed platformers like Sonic, racing games, and fighting games) then I think frame rate should be prioratized. However, if the game is slower paced and has more exploration (often times these games draw the player's attention through specific details in the scenary) then I would say resolution should be prioratized.

CrazyGamer2017 said:


The Switch is way too under powered which as the latest 2017 system out there should have no excuse for its lack of performance. Too much needs to be sacrificed to reach 60fps

The Switch is a handheld console with an SOC that is built around a similar process node size of a PS4 and XONE (20 nm for Switch and 28 nm for PS4 and XONE). Not to mentioned it consumes 15 watts of power versus over 100 watts that its stationary counterparts consume. There is no way it could perform the same way as a PS4 or XONE (Which you already mentioned did not meet your resolution and framerate expectation) and it would be impossible for it to exceed those systems. In fact, there is NO mobile chips out there today that Nintendo could have used to get similar performance as the XONE and PS4 and maintain the same form factor or price point of the Switch (the impossibleness of what you expect, is a pretty good excuse as to why not all games on Switch run at 1080P 60 FPS as far as I am concerned). If it was all this easy, Sony and MS would have made a portable PS4 and XONE (and heck one that would run all games at 1080P 60 FPS) as opposed to making their systems slightly slimmer. 



CrazyGamer2017 said:
curl-6 said:

Nintendo are no longer making dedicated home consoles; there isn't room on the market for three similar consoles to do well, there never has been. On the other hand, making an alternative product, the Switch, is clearly paying off. Plenty of Switch games are 1080p60 actually, and given the success of titles like Zelda gamers don't seem to mind too much if a game doesn't hit an arbitrary pixel count.

Well if the future of Nintendo is decided by people who lower their standards gen after gen then I fear that you might be right: There may never be a home system by that company again. Also the rest of the industry seems to steer towards norms (1080p, 4K, 60fps etc.) It seems strange to me that Nintendo is the only one that does not go that way. It's of course good news for the company as it means no need to invest money in advancing components and technology, just work on different concepts and voilà, people will flock to you. But as a consumer who wants a decent product, I am not too happy about this turn of events.

I'll cross fingers and hope one day to play BOTW on some future home system that will do justice to the new generations of televisions but if not then, I will have to send my divorce papers for Nintendo to sign them

I don't think it's so much a matter of lower standards but rather of different standards. A lot of people simply don't mind if a game is 1080p, 900p, or 4K, so long as it is fun. Gameplay is more important than pixel count for many.

It's strange you point out 60fps though, as Nintendo is actually pushing this standard far more than Sony or Microsoft; the majority of their first party titles are 60fps, while most big Playstation and Xbox titles run at 30fps.



curl-6 said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:

Well if the future of Nintendo is decided by people who lower their standards gen after gen then I fear that you might be right: There may never be a home system by that company again. Also the rest of the industry seems to steer towards norms (1080p, 4K, 60fps etc.) It seems strange to me that Nintendo is the only one that does not go that way. It's of course good news for the company as it means no need to invest money in advancing components and technology, just work on different concepts and voilà, people will flock to you. But as a consumer who wants a decent product, I am not too happy about this turn of events.

I'll cross fingers and hope one day to play BOTW on some future home system that will do justice to the new generations of televisions but if not then, I will have to send my divorce papers for Nintendo to sign them

I don't think it's so much a matter of lower standards but rather of different standards. A lot of people simply don't mind if a game is 1080p, 900p, or 4K, so long as it is fun. Gameplay is more important than pixel count for many.

It's strange you point out 60fps though, as Nintendo is actually pushing this standard far more than Sony or Microsoft; the majority of their first party titles are 60fps, while most big Playstation and Xbox titles run at 30fps.

Yeah but the question is how many people is "a lot of people" right?

Cause technically if what you said is right, then why even release new hardware? Why not stay with the Wii and the 3DS, both being very successful and since people don't care about higher norms, why not simply keep releasing on those successful systems?

As for games at 60fps on Nintendo, my point still stands, a weak hardware means either no 60fps or if they do, it means lowering elsewhere, like lower definition, no anti-aliasing, no extra effects etc... Cause there is NO WAY a game on the Switch can have the complexity of a game on the other systems and still go at 60fps. And at the end of the day, complex games that still run at 60fps on the Pro or the future X will be legion compared to those on the Switch, it can't be otherwise.



.

I'm in the zone, don't bother me!