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

Forums - Microsoft - Phil Spencer - "Why do you care about 60fps?"

vivster on 18 June 2017
Cerebralbore101 said:
vivster said:

The big difference here is that Windows is already such an open platform that you don't need another OS to play games.

It just shows the stark difference between PC and consoles. On PC you have a software platform that is so open, that you can do literally anything with it, yet there are even more software platforms, each just as open. That is ultimate choice.

On console you have just one single platform and that platform is so closed that you cannot do anything with it. It's absically the opposite of choice because you always just have one thing to "choose" from. It's nice that some games now offer you the ability to choose between 2 settings but it's nothing more that a mere tiny branch given to the player. 2 choices in a game is nothing to brag about when other platforms have literal thousands.

But Windows is an annoying intrusive operating system. I'd much rather game on Linux or Mac. Most games aren't developed for the other two operating systems though. 

I also don't like it when games force me to use a keyboard and mouse. Some games have such wierd control schemes that they are impossible to play on the steam controller, or they just don't support it. Starbound is one such example. Using the mouse to move your aiming reticule, and move in that game is just way too complicated. I'd much rather play it with D-Pad controls ala Contra or Super Metroid. 

Those are isolated cases though. Most games on PC let you use whatever you want and if they have a terrible control scheme on both there is usually a way to change it. That's the great thing about PC. Developers will always be shit, but at least on PC you have the power to mitigate their terribleness.

Dunno what to say about Windos as a platform. It gives you the power to change most of the annoyances, I'm not so sure Linux will let you do that easily or Mac at all. Your complaint is valid and shows how horrible monopolies can be. Still, having the power to choose the lesser evil is still better than to be dictated what evil you get.

I think choice complaints on PC are on a very high level because there is nothing that gives you more choice than PC.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
Imaginedvl on 18 June 2017
LudicrousSpeed said:
I also wish devs in the console scene would prioritize FPS over resolution but putting 60fps on the box will sell more to the hardcore and not the casuals. Making purty games has the opposite effect so of course that's where the market goes.

Always said that. I'm fine with 30 FPS actually for single player games but I would prioritize the details (more stuff on the screen, effect, etc...) at let's say 1080p or 920p than trying to get the game running at 4k and making compromise in that area...

But well, looks like all developpers out there are just going for the resolution, which is annoying some time. 



Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 18 June 2017
Imaginedvl said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Yes but it is still being rendered later thus causing input lag... While the game itself may have already registered the input and updated the world, the user still experiences input lag due to seeing his input 33 ms later on his screen... (or 16 ms later compared to 60fps)

I am not arguing how often the game will check for input cause that is correct, my issue is that framerate is still involved with input lag because by definition, "the input lag in video games is the time it takes for the user to click a button and seeing the game react on screen."

It's not just about "feeling" better, the game is actually more responsive at 60fps assuming again, the rest is up to snuff. 

I really think se are saying the same thing at the end :)

Then Good :P

Just wanted to make sure before some other people get confused and start saying framerate doesn't matter again



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

eva01beserk on 18 June 2017
vivster said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

That goes both ways. PC gamers don't have much of a choice in whether to game on Windows or another operating system, since most games require Windows to play. PC games don't offer a choice between digital or physical. 

It would be nice to be able to choose between lower graphics settings, and higher FPS on consoles at least. I think Nioh did this, which was neat. 

The big difference here is that Windows is already such an open platform that you don't need another OS to play games.

It just shows the stark difference between PC and consoles. On PC you have a software platform that is so open, that you can do literally anything with it, yet there are even more software platforms, each just as open. That is ultimate choice.

On console you have just one single platform and that platform is so closed that you cannot do anything with it. It's absically the opposite of choice because you always just have one thing to "choose" from. It's nice that some games now offer you the ability to choose between 2 settings but it's nothing more that a mere tiny branch given to the player. 2 choices in a game is nothing to brag about when other platforms have literal thousands.

Thats one way to look at it. I see it as its because we have so litle choice on consoles that devs can max out a console capabilitys by focusing development on a single setting. Its why consoles give more than a similary power pc. wich is why consoles are sunch a bang for the buck. The more choiceces you give the more compromises you have to make.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

KLAMarine on 18 June 2017
Tmfwang said:

In an interview with metro:

GC: What also frustrates me is that the only number I do care about is the only that you and Sony don’t obsess over. Which is 60fps, which I understand is easier to do on the Xbox One X than any other console.

PS: That’s correct. But… [laughs] Why do you care about 60fps?

GC: It’s the only number that affects gameplay and yet it’s the only one you two never go on about! No-one can tell the difference between 4K and 1080p and all that nonsense…

PS: You just broke your whole argument now!

GC: How?

PS: You just said these games could run on a Commodore 64, they would not run at 60 frames per second on a Commodore 64.

GC: Uridium did.

PS: [laughs] I’m not disagreeing with you. But it’s a subjective opinion that that’s the only one that matters.

All: [laughs]

GC: It’s the only one that affects gameplay.

PS: …visuals do affect gameplay.

GC: Not the resolution though. Not in any manner close to the difference a good frame rate makes.

PS: Don’t get me wrong. I love frame rate. I love Ori, it’s one of the reasons I love playing Forza Motorsport. But you have to go back to what you said before: most people. What frame rate does Minecraft run at?

GC: I know, but if the frame rate is below what it needs to be – and it does vary for different games – they do notice. They might not identify the problem, but they know something’s wrong.

PS: Some people do. Some people just want to have fun playing Lego Batman.

 

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/14/phil-spencer-xbox-one-x-interview-most-people-just-want-to-go-play-games-6707712/

tmfwang, why did you leave out the following portions?

GC: You could teach them! Show them: this is the difference it makes! Xbox One X alone is bringing this to you!

PS: [laughs] You have a cause, I love it! I was not expecting you to go from, ‘I don’t care about HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision but I care about 60fps! [laughs]

GC: …

PS: But you’re right, this console will make it more possible for developers to drive the resolution and frame rate consistency than any other console on the market.

GC: I would love to see 60fps mandated as a standard…

PS: I will tell you, as someone that’s run a platform now for a while, mandating gameplay decisions is a bad place for a platform holder to go in. Developers are completely incentivised to give you the best experience they can. We can both agree on that. So if they think it’s 60fps and that’s gonna help them, in terms of selling more copies of the game, they’re gonna be all in. Not everybody understands what 60fps vs. 30fps means. They’re not all as technical as you are.

Barkley said:

I mean, I understand what he's saying. A lot of people unfortunately don't seem to give a damn, I mean there's people that actually say "you can't tell difference between 30 and 60fps anyway." unironically, and all they're looking for is shiny visuals over frame-rate.

But that first line "Why do you care about 60fps?"....

Someone punch him in the face.

Why punch Phil in the face? Was it an unfair question?



Around the Network
onionberry on 18 June 2017

framerate > resolution. ALWAYS. But they don't understand that shit. I play every game at 60 fps, when I'm playing breath of the wild or bloodborne I'm suffering, a lot.



eva01beserk on 18 June 2017
KLAMarine said:
Tmfwang said:

In an interview with metro:

GC: What also frustrates me is that the only number I do care about is the only that you and Sony don’t obsess over. Which is 60fps, which I understand is easier to do on the Xbox One X than any other console.

PS: That’s correct. But… [laughs] Why do you care about 60fps?

GC: It’s the only number that affects gameplay and yet it’s the only one you two never go on about! No-one can tell the difference between 4K and 1080p and all that nonsense…

PS: You just broke your whole argument now!

GC: How?

PS: You just said these games could run on a Commodore 64, they would not run at 60 frames per second on a Commodore 64.

GC: Uridium did.

PS: [laughs] I’m not disagreeing with you. But it’s a subjective opinion that that’s the only one that matters.

All: [laughs]

GC: It’s the only one that affects gameplay.

PS: …visuals do affect gameplay.

GC: Not the resolution though. Not in any manner close to the difference a good frame rate makes.

PS: Don’t get me wrong. I love frame rate. I love Ori, it’s one of the reasons I love playing Forza Motorsport. But you have to go back to what you said before: most people. What frame rate does Minecraft run at?

GC: I know, but if the frame rate is below what it needs to be – and it does vary for different games – they do notice. They might not identify the problem, but they know something’s wrong.

PS: Some people do. Some people just want to have fun playing Lego Batman.

 

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/14/phil-spencer-xbox-one-x-interview-most-people-just-want-to-go-play-games-6707712/

tmfwang, why did you leave out the following portions?

GC: You could teach them! Show them: this is the difference it makes! Xbox One X alone is bringing this to you!

PS: [laughs] You have a cause, I love it! I was not expecting you to go from, ‘I don’t care about HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision but I care about 60fps! [laughs]

GC: …

PS: But you’re right, this console will make it more possible for developers to drive the resolution and frame rate consistency than any other console on the market.

GC: I would love to see 60fps mandated as a standard…

PS: I will tell you, as someone that’s run a platform now for a while, mandating gameplay decisions is a bad place for a platform holder to go in. Developers are completely incentivised to give you the best experience they can. We can both agree on that. So if they think it’s 60fps and that’s gonna help them, in terms of selling more copies of the game, they’re gonna be all in. Not everybody understands what 60fps vs. 30fps means. They’re not all as technical as you are.

Barkley said:

I mean, I understand what he's saying. A lot of people unfortunately don't seem to give a damn, I mean there's people that actually say "you can't tell difference between 30 and 60fps anyway." unironically, and all they're looking for is shiny visuals over frame-rate.

But that first line "Why do you care about 60fps?"....

Someone punch him in the face.

Why punch Phil in the face? Was it an unfair question?

Thank you. I wasent gona read that article :p.

Its the devs vision for their game. If they think its nesesary, they will do it. Im all for devs creative desing, they will optimize best how they see fit. If they want to they will be more pasionate and creative to reach a goal, than if a few gamers complain and want something and they put it in the game by force.  

And like phil says, most gamers want graphics, so if devs want to sell out, they will deliver graphics over framerate. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

contestgamer on 18 June 2017
archer9234 said:
Flilix said:
I don't care about either. But can understand why people would care about fps, while I really don't get why resolution is so important.

It's one of the things consoles, and tv companies have left to sell you new stuff. Once it becomes boring/common place for 4/8K they're SOL. Are you gonna buy a 8.1 or a 10.1 sound system. Over say a 5.1. Most likley no. There is no good reason to bother getting anymore speakers. All I really want from phones is them to focus on making a 12 hour battery and 1TB of space. All the "new features" are becoming more and more boring/pointless.

What, most phones already do that lol. Why would you aim so low anyway? 3-4 day battery life would be far better. old non smart phones had multi day battery lives.



KLAMarine on 18 June 2017
eva01beserk said:
KLAMarine said:

tmfwang, why did you leave out the following portions?

GC: You could teach them! Show them: this is the difference it makes! Xbox One X alone is bringing this to you!

PS: [laughs] You have a cause, I love it! I was not expecting you to go from, ‘I don’t care about HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision but I care about 60fps! [laughs]

GC: …

PS: But you’re right, this console will make it more possible for developers to drive the resolution and frame rate consistency than any other console on the market.

GC: I would love to see 60fps mandated as a standard…

PS: I will tell you, as someone that’s run a platform now for a while, mandating gameplay decisions is a bad place for a platform holder to go in. Developers are completely incentivised to give you the best experience they can. We can both agree on that. So if they think it’s 60fps and that’s gonna help them, in terms of selling more copies of the game, they’re gonna be all in. Not everybody understands what 60fps vs. 30fps means. They’re not all as technical as you are.

Why punch Phil in the face? Was it an unfair question?

Thank you. I wasent gona read that article :p.

Its the devs vision for their game. If they think its nesesary, they will do it. Im all for devs creative desing, they will optimize best how they see fit. If they want to they will be more pasionate and creative to reach a goal, than if a few gamers complain and want something and they put it in the game by force.  

And like phil says, most gamers want graphics, so if devs want to sell out, they will deliver graphics over framerate. 

Not necessary to read the entire thing, just the portions covering framerate.

 

For whatever reason, Tmfwang did not copy-paste the entire conversation regarding framerate...



Alby_da_Wolf on 18 June 2017

Framerate is very important for quick games. But as peripheral vision is low res, but has faster motion (and so flicker too) detection, a high framerate can feel more comfy also in slower games if played on a big screen from a short distance.
So, considering that every modern gaming engine has some degree of scalability, why the hell don't they just offer gamers the option to choose between higher res and higher framerate? It's simple and effective and it would make everybody happy.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!