Would you be okay with graphics staying at PS4/XBO level if it meant cheaper games and shorter dev times?

[Cerebralbore101]

I would love it, because games taking 7 years to make is way too long, and having a game be a rock solid 60fps at 4k would be better than trying to squeeze more detail into the 3D models and textures, just to have it run at 45 fps and 1440p or whatever. 

Pemalite said:

I am okay with older games having aging visuals.
I am not okay for new games having older visuals.

Xbox One/Playstation 4 was a terrible generation dominated by sub-1080P, sub-60fps games.

I don't think framerate and resolution are what Curl is talking about here. Basically, imagine if PS5/Series only ran games at PS4/XBOne levels of polycounts, lighting, and texture sizes, but actually hit 60 fps and 4k with everything easily. So basically we would be going back to how things were in the 16 bit generation where resolution and 60fps were standardized. Pretty much every 16 bit game back then ran at 60 fps and 240p. 

Edit: Also here's the biggest disconnect for me. Modern games are often made so that only somebody with two massive GPUs can actually run the game at max settings, resolution, and FPS. But that's such a teeny tiny portion of the videogame market that it's just not worth it. Why waste so much dev time just to impress the few that have a $5000 rig? It makes even less sense for console games. Why would you make a game for a console that can't run at 60 fps and 4K? It's not like the PS5 Pro suddenly takes all PS4 games and runs them at 60 fps and 4K. It's not like PS6 Pro will do the same for PS5 games. 

Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - on 16 January 2026