60 is definitely playable, but its not ideal

[krippaz]

KBG29 said:

Leadified said:

Areal-Llort said:
The problem with today is people have such high standards that they deem anything lower than 60fps as garbage, same goes for people that care about 1080 resolution.

1080p and 60 FPS have been standards on your average PC for years now. It's rather disappointing in 2014 when next generation consoles still can't hit that. Playing under 60 FPS is not ideal but it's not the end of the world, however it is annoying when many last gen and so far it's looking many current gen games can't even hit 30 FPS.

Firstly, 1920 x 1200 with ultra settings has not been 60fps consistantly on even high end GPU's. This requires turning off some settings to reach even on flagship cards. It would also require yearly updates to the flagship card to pull off this feat in the handful of titles it is possible in. The yearly battlefield, and COD will start to drop about 15 - 20% of the previous years fps. If you go to more PC exclusive titles like Company of Heroes, they will never reach 1080p/60fps with ultra settings.

Secondly, even if these consoles had i7 + Titan Black or FX 9000 + R9 290x on a APU with 16GB of stacked RAM, and 1TB transfer rates, they still would not be 1080p/60fps consistantly. Developers will always push the envelope, not matter how much power they are given. The fact is 30fps is perfectly fine, and so it will always be the bar. 60fps will only be in select titles were a developer sets that as the foundation the game is built upon. Anything over 60fps will never be on consoles as it is completely pointless.

As beeing mostly a PC gamer I and all my friends played on 60 fps or more, we reduced the setting to get more FPS. Why buy a 120 hz monitor and play 30 fps ?. Max settings isnt needed most of the time they are still so good,

 

and yes I have a I7, 16 gb ram and only a 7970 Ghz edition and so does all of my friends.