Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Phil Spencer confident after seeing PS5 presentation - Gamelab 2020 interview

How do you think MS will perform at the July presentation?

MS will be in a league of its own 5 6.58%
 
MS will do better than the PS5 presentation 14 18.42%
 
MS will do as good as the PS5 presentation 13 17.11%
 
MS will do less well than... 44 57.89%
 
Total:76
DonFerrari said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Dlala Studios. The game is Battletoads 

Battletoads is supposed to be AAAA?

16k resolution, 240 fps, USES unreal Engine 8, requires 32 teraflops to run and 160 gigs of dedicated DDR7 RAM. It's a 1 terabyte download (with 500 gigs of DLC).



Around the Network
Dulfite said:
DonFerrari said:

Battletoads is supposed to be AAAA?

16k resolution, 240 fps, USES unreal Engine 8, requires 32 teraflops to run and 160 gigs of dedicated DDR7 RAM. It's a 1 terabyte download (with 500 gigs of DLC).

^^ The Future xD.



kirby007 said:
goopy20 said:

Exactly, 4k and 60fps are nice buzz words but in the end people don't care about them at all when they're playing a game. TLOU2 Is a way more visually impressive game than Gears, for example. Even though TLOU2 runs in 30fps and Gears 5 at 60fps.

Sony will have games that are targeting 30fps and run in 1440p (or checkerboard rendering) and they will likely look way more impressive than a Series X game running at 4k/60fps. Hell even a RTX2080 is already struggling to hit a steady 60fps at 4k with current gen games, which means there won't be much juice left on Series X for boosting overall visual fidelity.

this is so stupid that it isn't even funny, ofcourse if you need less resources you can put it in other parts, but that doesn't mean a fps plays better with 30fps vs 60fps
hell if i want a good looking story i might aswell go to the cinema and watch 8k content @24fps

It all depends man. Sure, for some games like fast paced FPS or racing games 60fps can be important. But did anyone complain about games like BOTW, GTA5, RDR2, GOW, TLOU2 etc. because they're not 60fps? If we're talking about next gen consoles, I'm pretty sure most people would pick a generational leap in overall visual fidelity and immersion over playing the same games we're playing now in 120fps. 

If 60fps and 4k were that important, why did so few upgrade to a mid-gen console? And why did the UE5 tech demo got everybody excited when it was just running in 30fps?

Last edited by goopy20 - 3 days ago

LudicrousSpeed said:
kirby007 said:

quite a 360 of opinion from last gen isn't it?

At the start of this gen it was a disgrace if one console had even a tiny resolution difference. If only we’d known back then that no one actually cares about resolution or frame rate when playing a game. 

What a silly thing to say. Plus it’s a contradiction. People who are ok with 30 frames are usually ok with it because they know it means better graphics. Yet these people wouldn’t care about resolution? Just look at the people saying Sony games are ok at 30 frames in this very thread. If LoU2 could look as good at 60, they’d love 60. But it wouldn’t look as good, so they’re ok with 30. But resolution? Ah who cares.

MAybe it was a disgrace on forums or people who watch DF comparison videos. But did people really care that games like Halo 4/5 were 720p? Truth is, loads of people like the idea of 4k, 60fps but once they play a game, they won't be able to tell the difference. Like Phil says, its more a feeling while visual fidelity is something that's instantly noticeable. 

I have played some games in 120fps on my gsync monitor and I honestly couldn't tell the difference. I did notice how my games looked like hot garbage because I had to turn all settings to low to hit that 120fps, though.

Last edited by goopy20 - 3 days ago

LudicrousSpeed said:
People don’t care about resolution or frame rate when playing a game? LOL what am I reading

Also give me 60fps campaign over 30 any day of the week, thanks. Much more impressive, much more responsive.

Okay, then tell me which are the best games you played this gen and how many of them were in 60fps? 



Around the Network
zero129 said:
Dulfite said:

16k resolution, 240 fps, USES unreal Engine 8, requires 32 teraflops to run and 160 gigs of dedicated DDR7 RAM. It's a 1 terabyte download (with 500 gigs of DLC).

^^ The Future xD.

The visual clarity sucks in the future then.

Green enemies + flesh toned/brown (when the toads should be one colour pallet and enemies another).
Flat enemies? skinny arsed enemys hard to notice? enemies climbing ontop of one another.

Visually the combat seems so confused compaired to the simplisty and style the orginal had.



They also overly complicated the combat right?
makeing it more akin to playing a fighting game, but its not supposed to be a battletoads that plays like street fighter, its supposed to have simple combat.



goopy20 said:
kirby007 said:

this is so stupid that it isn't even funny, ofcourse if you need less resources you can put it in other parts, but that doesn't mean a fps plays better with 30fps vs 60fps
hell if i want a good looking story i might aswell go to the cinema and watch 8k content @24fps

It all depends man. Sure, for some games like fast paced FPS or racing games 60fps can be important. But did anyone complain about games like BOTW, GTA5, RDR2, GOW, TLOU2 etc. because they're not 60fps? If we're talking about next gen consoles, I'm pretty sure most people would pick a generational leap in overall visual fidelity and immersion over playing the same games we're playing now in 120fps. 

If 60fps and 4k were that important, why did so few upgrade to a mid-gen console? And why did the UE5 tech demo got everybody excited when it was just running in 30fps?

Thats a good point.
How well made something plays and looks, matters so much more than if its 30fps or 60fps, and honestly even less is gonna care if its 60 or 120 fps.



goopy20 said:
kirby007 said:

this is so stupid that it isn't even funny, ofcourse if you need less resources you can put it in other parts, but that doesn't mean a fps plays better with 30fps vs 60fps
hell if i want a good looking story i might aswell go to the cinema and watch 8k content @24fps

It all depends man. Sure, for some games like fast paced FPS or racing games 60fps can be important. But did anyone complain about games like BOTW, GTA5, RDR2, GOW, TLOU2 etc. because they're not 60fps? If we're talking about next gen consoles, I'm pretty sure most people would pick a generational leap in overall visual fidelity and immersion over playing the same games we're playing now in 120fps. 

If 60fps and 4k were that important, why did so few upgrade to a mid-gen console? And why did the UE5 tech demo got everybody excited when it was just running in 30fps?

Shouldn’t bring casuals into this to prove a point. We all know that’s the reason the mid gen console upgrades weren’t widely adopted. Im more curious about the double standards. Ok, people like the graphics that come with 30fps for slow paced games. But how 4K isn’t important anymore? It seemed to matter a lot when PS4 did 1080p and Xbox 1 did 900p. I was actually surprised when I discovered the UE demo was 1440p, felt like it should have been higher. 



 

 

sales2099 said:
goopy20 said:

It all depends man. Sure, for some games like fast paced FPS or racing games 60fps can be important. But did anyone complain about games like BOTW, GTA5, RDR2, GOW, TLOU2 etc. because they're not 60fps? If we're talking about next gen consoles, I'm pretty sure most people would pick a generational leap in overall visual fidelity and immersion over playing the same games we're playing now in 120fps. 

If 60fps and 4k were that important, why did so few upgrade to a mid-gen console? And why did the UE5 tech demo got everybody excited when it was just running in 30fps?

Shouldn’t bring casuals into this to prove a point. We all know that’s the reason the mid gen console upgrades weren’t widely adopted. Im more curious about the double standards. Ok, people like the graphics that come with 30fps for slow paced games. But how 4K isn’t important anymore? It seemed to matter a lot when PS4 did 1080p and Xbox 1 did 900p. I was actually surprised when I discovered the UE demo was 1440p, felt like it should have been higher. 

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.  

Last edited by goopy20 - 3 days ago

goopy20 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

At the start of this gen it was a disgrace if one console had even a tiny resolution difference. If only we’d known back then that no one actually cares about resolution or frame rate when playing a game. 

What a silly thing to say. Plus it’s a contradiction. People who are ok with 30 frames are usually ok with it because they know it means better graphics. Yet these people wouldn’t care about resolution? Just look at the people saying Sony games are ok at 30 frames in this very thread. If LoU2 could look as good at 60, they’d love 60. But it wouldn’t look as good, so they’re ok with 30. But resolution? Ah who cares.

MAybe it was a disgrace on forums or people who watch DF comparison videos. But did people really care that games like Halo 4/5 were 720p? Truth is, loads of people like the idea of 4k, 60fps but once they play a game, they won't be able to tell the difference. Like Phil says, its more a feeling while visual fidelity is something that's instantly noticeable. 

I have played some games in 120fps on my gsync monitor and I honestly couldn't tell the difference. I did notice how my games looked like hot garbage because I had to turn all settings to low to hit that 120fps, though.

goopy20 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
People don’t care about resolution or frame rate when playing a game? LOL what am I reading

Also give me 60fps campaign over 30 any day of the week, thanks. Much more impressive, much more responsive.

Okay, then tell me which are the best games you played this gen and how many of them were in 60fps? 

It was routinely discussed here at the start of the gen. You were questioned as to how you could possibly game on a system that played a game at 720 or 900p. And that’s compared to 1080p. Now you’re trying to tell us people don’t care or can’t tell the difference in 4k lol. Why did MicroSony even bother with Scorpio or Pro then? Why are UHDs even a thing? 

Ive played tons of games this gen that are 30 or 60 and higher. But at 60 on my Scorpio I have played Titanfall 2, Horizon 4, FM7, Wolfenstein, the CoD2k20 campaign, Red Faction, Battlefront 2, Doom, Battlefield, Neir, Gears 4/5, Halo MCC/5, Tomb Raider Rise, among many others and not including PC or PS4 games. Plus a lot of Nintendo titles on Switch that I own are 60. Also bear in mind a lot of these games on Scorpio have options to pick between graphics or frame rate and I will pick the frame rate every time because smoother gameplay is the most important.