Quantcast
Scarlett Will Prioritize Frame Rate Over Graphics

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Scarlett Will Prioritize Frame Rate Over Graphics

Tagged games:

Do you prefer 60/4k with reduced visuals or 30/4k with increased visuals?

YES! 27 38.57%
 
No. 5 7.14%
 
Depends on the game. 31 44.29%
 
I dont care. 7 10.00%
 
Total:70

Personally I'm fine with 30 fps for many genres like action-adventure and would prefer a focus on graphics over framerate for those genres. But other genres like racing, fighting games, and first person shooters need 60 fps.



Around the Network
chakkra said:
Azzanation said:

DF mentions many times on the Switch that 720p looks sharp on a small screen in portable mode. This is no different the bigger the screen the more noticable the pixels get.

I gamed on a 42inch 1080p screen and it looked super sharp. Going to 55inch 4k screen, i can tell if i am running 1080p instead of 4k. 

Honestly anything around 30inches i am happen to drop resolution for preformance however on a big 4k TV i wont, due to how noticable it is.

It doesnt take a rocket science to see a difference, however it depends if its worth the preformance gap.

I agree with you there. I had a 21" monitor and for the life of me I was never able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p in there. I was like, wtf are these people talking about?

It wasn't until I upgraded to a 24" that I started to notice the difference, and even then it was negligible.

Love the chats about 24/32/55 inches and all my games done on a 1080p projector @160" unless I take the Switch out of the dock when I'm leaving the flat, then it's back to 6" but that recent Virtua Racing game... on my setup each player gets a 40" screen for themselves...

And I still think back to times when I used to play 4 player Halo on a 16" portable lol.

also (non shit) 4k Projectors cost 4k at the time I was buying... so wasn't an option, maybe sometime in the future it will be!



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

Well this is obvious , and also it depend on the developer . I hope next gen consoles able to choose between graphic quality , frame rates or resolution just like how PS4 pro or X does currently.



CGI-Quality said:
Azzanation said:

You tell me who, apparently someone in here is a layman and i am curious to know. Happy to help, i dont charge for knowledge however sometimes i think i should on here. Apparently everyone in here is an eye optometrist.

Considering it was you who called something 'eye-popingly better', this should have been left out of the post. In reality, you don't have to be an eye optometrist (a term you're using out of place as it is) to give a view on something.

As far as who you can 'educate', what exactly do you think it is you can teach someone in here? 

Okay, I obviously used the wrong term here. Eye popping to me is that I can notice a difference easily without going into a in-depth look, that wasn't meant to come across as a worlds difference, but I can personally tell switching back and forth my resolutions on my TV that it isn't something I need a magnified glass to see. So ill take it back and say, 1440p to 4k is noticeable but not a worlds difference if that makes things better.  

That last part of your post wasn't meant for you.



Azzanation said:
CGI-Quality said:

Considering it was you who called something 'eye-popingly better', this should have been left out of the post. In reality, you don't have to be an eye optometrist (a term you're using out of place as it is) to give a view on something.

As far as who you can 'educate', what exactly do you think it is you can teach someone in here? 

Okay, I obviously used the wrong term here. Eye popping to me is that I can notice a difference easily without going into a in-depth look, that wasn't meant to come across as a worlds difference, but I can personally tell switching back and forth my resolutions on my TV that it isn't something I need a magnified glass to see. So ill take it back and say, 1440p to 4k is noticeable but not a worlds difference if that makes things better.  

That last part of your post wasn't meant for you.

Fair enough.



                                                                                                                                            

Around the Network

Just remembered that it was only a couple of years ago that Phil Spencer was asking people why they even cared about 60fps. Bit weird to go from that to this.



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)

Switch lite really screwed up my Switch prediction this year! Looks like it's going to be about 19.5m-20m for the Switch in 2019, 14.3m for PS4.

Barkley said:
Just remembered that it was only a couple of years ago that Phil Spencer was asking people why they even cared about 60fps. Bit weird to go from that to this.

Are you referring to that metro interview where he simply asks the interviewer why he prefers frame rate to visuals? Or did I miss some interview where he actually asked why anyone would care about frame rate?

Because in that interview he was clearly just asking a personal question and did say frame rate was important. But he’s also selling products to the masses. 4k, UHD, etc look better to the masses than 60fps, thats why Sony and Microsoft went with that for marketing their refresh consoles. 

I’m genuinely curious about whether I missed some interview or if this is the biggest stretch for misrepresenting a Phil quote in a long while lol.



Barkley said:
Just remembered that it was only a couple of years ago that Phil Spencer was asking people why they even cared about 60fps. Bit weird to go from that to this.

Papa Phill is ever right so reality changes whenever he say so.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Scarlett needs to be able to run every single Xbox One X game at a rock solid 4K and 60fps. There can't be a drop of dynamic resolution or frame drops.

If Scarlett can't do that it will be underpowered out the gate. Nothing about an X1X game should be taxing on Scarlett.



Barkley said:
thismeintiel said:

100% agreed. It's the same reason 48fps failed for films. It no longer looks like an epic movie, but a cheap soap opera, no matter how much is spent on the effects.

The only reason for this is because movies have always been 24fps and soap opera's have always been 60fps. It's just how your brain has been conditioned.

60fps is objectively better.

Except that is clearly not, because most people say that even 48fps look stupid in movies. Although I don't think it's quite the same thing in movies and in games, it's kind of confusing. In games it's about fluidity versus stutter, whereas in film it's about the visual look.