By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sales2099 said:
goopy20 said:

Did Xbox game sales tank because they were 900p vs 1080p on ps4? Maybe it mattered a lot on forums but the average Joe probably doesn't even know some games are running at 720p on Xone vs 1080 on ps4.

Like I said, people like the idea of 4k/60fps but in the end they don't care once they see and play the games. If you look at one of the highest rated and visually impressive games like RDR2, it wouldn't have looked the way it did if it was targeting 60fps. Same thing for the UE tech demo. Aiming for 4k and 60fps simply comes at the expense of what developers can put in their games and in reality people care a lot more about the overall visual fidelity. 

MS is making it sound like 60fps is something next gen, while the ps2 had a ton of games that were 60fps already. Ratchet & Clank pops to mind which was 60fps on the ps2 and now we have a ps5 R&C game running in 30fps. It has nothing to do with power, it's a design choice. Developers like Insomniac stopped aiming for 60fps a long, long time ago. They said nobody really cared, because they'll still buy the game and they're not exactly wrong. Its the same thing with native 4k, especially when most people can't even tell the difference when they're playing on a tv.  

It certainly didn’t help when multiplats are 90%+ of a consoles library. Why would you pay more for weaker multiplats? We aren’t the average Joe, we are the forum dwellers that put more thought in our hobby. I don’t care what they think, tell me what you personally think. In this regard I simply can’t overlook the changing priorities between gens.

For slow paced 3rd person games sure I see the value in capping at 30. But at least with next gen 4K should a target. Being ok with less is changing the narrative and/or settling for less in my opinion. Personally I’m excited to see 4K/60  be a standard for next gen for Xbox. Makes me feel like we getting the next step.

But even then you have a game like Gears 5 which was 60fps and looked gorgeous. Played butter smooth and had some very beautiful set pieces and vistas. I will say that other people mentioned an option of choosing 4K/30 FPS or Dynamic/60 FPS is a good idea and that should be a staple. Hellblade was one such game that offered it. 

For other genres it’s night and day. Halo 5 and MCC compared to the 360 Halos at 30fps....damn I feel like I was playing gimped versions compared to 60fps. Same goes for fighters and racers. I think better gameplay takes priority over slightly better visuals. We aren’t casuals, we should have discerning tastes that rise above the masses need for purdy pictures. 

Point being of a dev can make a next gen game look beautiful and target 4K/60 FPS, that would be ideal right? Of course it would be. 

If you want to have 4k60fps as standard and if MS follows that you better be ready to have XSX games looking substantially inferior to the ones on PS5 when a dev like ND decides to push the envelope to the limit and choose 1440p30fps, because XSX doesn't have that much higher power to have better visuals while doing twice framerate and twice pixel count.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."