| 2008ProchargedGT said: The reason this logic fails your argument is Respawn could have lowered the resolution to get higher fps. Thats a fact what we dont know is how much the resolution had to be lowered. So Respawn made a decision that the resolution was more important at that point than getting a higher fps. For all we know they would had to lower the res to 480p to achieve this, which would make there decision justified. When you make a blanket statement about how FPS is alway more important than res it backs you into a corner in situations like this where you need to spin spin spin. Just be consistent and unbiased, is it that hard? |
They raised the resolution from beta to retail and the frame rate was the same. So no, we don't know for a fact that lowering the resolution would have improved the frame rate. This is a recycled argument from earlier in the thread and I already debunked it.
It's nothing like AW where there is another version of the game running on a similar console with a dynamic (aka lower in some situations) resolution and the result is a better frame rate. I am simply wondering why they did not opt to use that technique on PS4, and hope it wasn't for a resolution bullet point, because that fucking sucks. But apparently this means I cannot enjoy any game that drops even half a frame and I should desire DEMAND games be lowered to 320x200 for optimal frame rates.
Or something to that effect, LOL. Hilarious.
