I don't really understand your premise. You're talking about performance adjusters as if they were content. You don't "miss out" by optimizing or tweaking the performance of a game to the qualities you feel are most important. So I suppose what I read into this, is that you don't really know what you value most performance wise in any given type of game. Unless of course it's somehow perfect performance across the board.

To answer your question though, yes, options are good. Great in fact. The more the better, as long as they're not made needlessly complicated somehow.

You really think it is that big of a deal moving sliders around so they can hit their optimal FPS target? Literally all they do is go into a settings file and change characters around turning effects on/off etc. Just saying it is such a small amount added to their workload making a game.

Yes, because it's a lot more than moving sliders around. If you look at all those DF comparisons over the year there were always extra differences with a bit more detail here, bit more grass in some scenes, bit less transparency effects in other scenes, different shadow resolutions for different objects, differences in reflections and dynamic lighting updates.

You think it's a slider to reduce the trackside detail in DC VR version? They probably removed a lot more than necessary as it is a lot of work to test every section of every track of the game with 8 cars in view, sparks and dust flying to make sure it never dips below 60fps no matter what. To make a proper optimized version would take a lot of effort. Fine tuning each area takes time, at least if you don't want it to look as basic as DC VR does.


Case in point for Tombraider:

Another Pro title that needs a bit of work, but shows huge promise. The base PS4 title is absolutely beautiful, and developer Nixxes has a stunning checkerboard 4K mode that demonstrates just how effective this technique can be. Unfortunately, larger 'hub' areas like the Geothermal Valley and the Soviet Installation can see frame-rate drops beneath the 30fps target.

The unlocked frame-rate mode sees performance touch 60fps in the more linear levels, dropping to around 40fps in the hub areas.

The enriched visual mode retains 1080p image quality (complete with ropey anti-aliasing) but adds improved PureHair tech, better texture filtering, more realistic reflections, higher LODs, sun soft shadows and more dynamic foliage.

Unfortunately, patch 1.05 has nerfed proper frame-pacing on both Pro and base PS4 hardware, giving a jittery presentation that is a huge downgrade compared to the silky smooth consistency we experienced at the Pro's launch with the title in its 1.04 iteration.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-playstation-4-pro-game-upgrade-guide

So we have 3 modes, none of them work optimally. Perhaps if they had concetrated on a single mode, that mode could have had a locked frame rate with proper frame pacing.

Keep posting like this and you're going to have my vote for best VGChartz member. 

I like choice, but I hope it doesn't mean that each individual mode is worse than if the dev had just chosen 1 mode and stuck to optimizing for only that.

I like options but not the vast majority I'm offered with my PS4 Pro.

I either get a 1080/60 mode that downsamples from a higher resolution with frame drops, or a 1800p/4K mode that runs at 30FPS with drops into the mid 20's.

I wish they would just offer 2 choices: 1080/60 or 1440/30 with ZERO drops.

Hopefully this improves in the future with games developed with PS4 Pro in mind.

L-L-Level of Detail?

:P

Games like MGS5, DooM, Battlefront, Project Cars, Rocket League, Metro: Redux, Killzone SF (MP), Diablo 3, Forza 5+6, Gears of War UE and 4, Halo 5...

These are all examples of great looking games that ran at 60FPS on vanilla PS4/Xbox One hardware.  

I have been a PC gamer for 25+ years and I understand how processors can bottleneck graphics cards in certain games but the reason the vast majority of these developers are opting for higher resolutions instead of frame rates is because of convenience and the 4K buzz.  

When you look at a game like KZ: SF or Gears of War 4 or even Uncharted 4, they all sacrifice resolution for a locked 60FPS in multiplayer.

They could easily do that for enhanced games on the PS4 Pro as well (no, not all, but most) but they choose to increase resolution instead because of the 4K buzz and convenience. 

I know it's not going to change but I wish that it would.

I want to put my game in my console and play and worry about nothing else. I don't like a console being like a PC because then a console loses it's point.

Having options is usually the best answer, though when it comes to display options, I don't really care about that. It only matters when playing a horror game, perhaps.