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

Forums - Gaming - How important is 60fps to you?

 

What do you think?

Anything less is unacceptable 20 16.26%
 
It's very important 40 32.52%
 
It's nice, but 30fps is still fine 44 35.77%
 
It's not important 19 15.45%
 
Total:123
SvennoJ on 29 May 2021
chakkra said:
SvennoJ said:

Well there's BotW on Switch, physics based game play.
Death Stranding on PS4, lot of physics go in carrying, balancing and stacking all the things you transport.
Driveclub dynamic weather / time of day simulation, which GT Sport can't do at 60 fps.
Open world RPGs, lot of world simulation goes on there, also GTA5.
The last of us 2, global illumination and indirect lighting as well as water simulation and reflections.

Plenty advancements, but can't make the AI too smart. The player still needs to feel all powerful and kill hundreds of bad guys by himself. There's no way to make realistic AI on that premise. Shooting galleries is all that's allowed. Yet there have been plenty advancements in other areas of AI, pathing, animation blending, sound, lag forward prediction, even AA.

Fact is, a game with 30fps target can pull off a lot more. Then next gen you can run it at 60fps or on PC with all those benefits.

The thing is that, in this day and age, you cannot release a 1080p-30fps game anymore. Developers need to target 1440p at the very minimum, and | believe any 1440p-30fps game could have a 900p-60fps mode with just a very few downgrades in graphics.

Take the Unreal5 Demo, for example. I'm sure that demo would be able to run at 60fps on the PS5 at 900p with very few graphical downgrades.

And at the end of the day, it is not like the 1440-30fps would suddenly disappear. You are just adding another option.

You need to dial back a lot more than resolution to get to 60fps. I can set the resolution as low as possible on FS2020 and it will never hit 60fps, until I dial back draw distance, cloud complexity, lighting, shadows, reflections.

You can't get around the fact that the CPU needs to make twice as many draw calls at 60 fps than at 30 fps. Time that's lost for use on other things. So if devs target 1440p at 30fps, chances are, more needs to be simplified to hit 900p60. Just look at the sacrifices Driveclub had to make to transition to 60fps on PSVR. No dynamic weather, no dynamic time, max 8 cars on track, all on top of very low resolution and lower draw distance / detail.

To keep the door open between 1440p30 and 900p60, design decision will have to be made to make sure it can reach 900p60.



Around the Network
chakkra on 29 May 2021
IcaroRibeiro said:
chakkra said:

The thing is that, in this day and age, you cannot release a 1080p-30fps game anymore. Developers need to target 1440p at the very minimum, and | believe any 1440p-30fps game could have a 900p-60fps mode with just a very few downgrades in graphics.

Why not? 

I understand some of you have standards, but those standards aren't shared for all gamers. A game like Horizon tailor made for PS4 runs perfectly and has a graphic overhaul and vast open world runs 30 FPS on console and nobody gave a damn, it didn't impacted its sales negatively nor stopped the game to be one of the biggest selling debut games ever 

They very likely couldn't provide a game with the same graphics quality, open world design and environment if they used most of the hardware it was designed to (PS4) for making it have more frames per second 

I think this is a perspective of a PC gamer "make the game thinking on the higher end specs then scaled it down for people who does not have fancy PCs", it works perfectly. However the perspective for a console it "this should run flawlessly in every piece of hardware of this console family". Instead of working on higher resolution and higher framerates they should provide the best games they could make running in a hardware with a specific set up, and this will eventually lead them to sacrifice something 

I do enjoy when games give me the option of choosing graphics vs performance, but I understand a game like The Last of Us 2 could never run 60 FPS on PS4 in the way it was conceptualized. Talking about Switch hardware things get even more limited as Switch is severely underpowered compared to other consoles in market, for Nintendo the choice of 30 FPS or 60 FPS is the choice of what mechanics can be implemented and I'm not sure if anyone wants to some Nintendo games to have less mechanics just for a spike in the number of FPS that almost nobody in Nintendo consoles is really paying attention 

Why not you ask? Maybe Sony would be able to get away with it but I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that if MS announced tomorrow that HB2 and Gears 6 will be running at 1080p-30fps the whole internet and media would not shut up about how "disappointed" they are and how that is not acceptable for a next-gen game, no matter how good the trailers might look. Heck, one of the Digital Foundry guys already caused a commotion on Twitter because apparently, a "1080p UI is 'unacceptable' in a next-gen console"

Heck, I'm willing to bet that many of the people that are here defending 30fps would be first in line criticizing them.



IcaroRibeiro on 30 May 2021
chakkra said:

Why not you ask? Maybe Sony would be able to get away with it but I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that if MS announced tomorrow that HB2 and Gears 6 will be running at 1080p-30fps the whole internet and media would not shut up about how "disappointed" they are and how that is not acceptable for a next-gen game, no matter how good the trailers might look. Heck, one of the Digital Foundry guys already caused a commotion on Twitter because apparently, a "1080p UI is 'unacceptable' in a next-gen console"

Heck, I'm willing to bet that many of the people that are here defending 30fps would be first in line criticizing them.

Well didn't know MS fans this sort of fetish in 60 FPS games but I assure you neither Nintendo nor Sony sales are being halved by the lack of 60 FPS. Maybe you should stop paying attention to this media outlets and pay attention to what the majority of gamers are playing. PC gamers who can afford high end hardware are another thing altogether, they are paying premium price for their hardware and they are more well versed about tech and system specifications, so it's not unnatural for someone who is affording a 2k USD PC be not only more picky but also more conforming if your PC doesn't run a game at higher res/frames it your PC at fault and you just need to upgrade it

The reality of console market is not the same. People want to play consoles because of both simplicity and familiarity, you get a game and this game runs as good as possible in your hardware. The mindset is if the game doesn't perform well then it's the game that isn't well enough optimized, you see? Nobody really blames the hardware, because the devs knew exactly for what hardware they were developing for. If running 30 FPS is the best (sometimes the only) way of putting said game to run on consoles so be it, in you are unsatisfied I strongly advice you to go PC gaming because console gaming isn't for you 



eva01beserk on 30 May 2021
IcaroRibeiro said:
chakkra said:

Why not you ask? Maybe Sony would be able to get away with it but I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that if MS announced tomorrow that HB2 and Gears 6 will be running at 1080p-30fps the whole internet and media would not shut up about how "disappointed" they are and how that is not acceptable for a next-gen game, no matter how good the trailers might look. Heck, one of the Digital Foundry guys already caused a commotion on Twitter because apparently, a "1080p UI is 'unacceptable' in a next-gen console"

Heck, I'm willing to bet that many of the people that are here defending 30fps would be first in line criticizing them.

Well didn't know MS fans this sort of fetish in 60 FPS games but I assure you neither Nintendo nor Sony sales are being halved by the lack of 60 FPS. Maybe you should stop paying attention to this media outlets and pay attention to what the majority of gamers are playing. PC gamers who can afford high end hardware are another thing altogether, they are paying premium price for their hardware and they are more well versed about tech and system specifications, so it's not unnatural for someone who is affording a 2k USD PC be not only more picky but also more conforming if your PC doesn't run a game at higher res/frames it your PC at fault and you just need to upgrade it

The reality of console market is not the same. People want to play consoles because of both simplicity and familiarity, you get a game and this game runs as good as possible in your hardware. The mindset is if the game doesn't perform well then it's the game that isn't well enough optimized, you see? Nobody really blames the hardware, because the devs knew exactly for what hardware they were developing for. If running 30 FPS is the best (sometimes the only) way of putting said game to run on consoles so be it, in you are unsatisfied I strongly advice you to go PC gaming because console gaming isn't for you 

Might want to add price to that as well. I can guaranty you that there are plenty of people who would love to have a 2k pc but the best they can do is a 500 console. And if that's all you can have you know there will be compromises. So you hope the devs do the best they can with the limited hardware and 30fps is sometimes a must. 



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

chakkra on 30 May 2021
IcaroRibeiro said:
chakkra said:

Why not you ask? Maybe Sony would be able to get away with it but I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that if MS announced tomorrow that HB2 and Gears 6 will be running at 1080p-30fps the whole internet and media would not shut up about how "disappointed" they are and how that is not acceptable for a next-gen game, no matter how good the trailers might look. Heck, one of the Digital Foundry guys already caused a commotion on Twitter because apparently, a "1080p UI is 'unacceptable' in a next-gen console"

Heck, I'm willing to bet that many of the people that are here defending 30fps would be first in line criticizing them.

Well didn't know MS fans this sort of fetish in 60 FPS games but I assure you neither Nintendo nor Sony sales are being halved by the lack of 60 FPS. Maybe you should stop paying attention to this media outlets and pay attention to what the majority of gamers are playing. PC gamers who can afford high end hardware are another thing altogether, they are paying premium price for their hardware and they are more well versed about tech and system specifications, so it's not unnatural for someone who is affording a 2k USD PC be not only more picky but also more conforming if your PC doesn't run a game at higher res/frames it your PC at fault and you just need to upgrade it

The reality of console market is not the same. People want to play consoles because of both simplicity and familiarity, you get a game and this game runs as good as possible in your hardware. The mindset is if the game doesn't perform well then it's the game that isn't well enough optimized, you see? Nobody really blames the hardware, because the devs knew exactly for what hardware they were developing for. If running 30 FPS is the best (sometimes the only) way of putting said game to run on consoles so be it, in you are unsatisfied I strongly advice you to go PC gaming because console gaming isn't for you 

Ok,

1st) I don't know at which point this discussion became about sales and about what fanbase prefers what. I thought we were talking about the supposed sacrifices the devs needed to make to get a game to run at 60fps.

2nd) You are ignoring the second part of my statement. I said, "publishers cannot release a 1080p-30fps game anymore." So far Sony hasn't released a game running on the PS5 at those settings, and I HIGHLY doubt that they will ever do.



Around the Network
Chazore on 30 May 2021
curl-6 said:

It's not exactly advanced knowledge; for a game to run at 60fps both the CPU and GPU have to hit that speed, or else one will hold back the other. Just as this means the load on the GPU has to be less, it similarly means the load on the CPU as to be less.

As for ports to Switch, I think that's pretty self-explanatory, Switch uses a mobile SoC several years old by now so performance sacrifices are necessary compared to a PC which can be many, many times more powerful.

I know, but I haven't seen you talking about it in this kind of depth for years on here. Even at times when games would be ported to Switch, you said you were fine with what you got, but now you debate in favour of 30fps over 60, which is what seems off when seeing this kind of knowledge being used.

Yes I know you keep saying one needs to be better than the other or it all falls back, but that's not really a concern as much for those running their own hw as much as it is a concern for those creating a closed plastic box.

Well of course, because Nintendo chose to within reasons of their own. They had up to 3 choices of chips at the time, but they went with the first, being likely to stay within budget, with little concern on big or raw power.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

curl-6 on 30 May 2021
Chazore said:
curl-6 said:

It's not exactly advanced knowledge; for a game to run at 60fps both the CPU and GPU have to hit that speed, or else one will hold back the other. Just as this means the load on the GPU has to be less, it similarly means the load on the CPU as to be less.

As for ports to Switch, I think that's pretty self-explanatory, Switch uses a mobile SoC several years old by now so performance sacrifices are necessary compared to a PC which can be many, many times more powerful.

I know, but I haven't seen you talking about it in this kind of depth for years on here. Even at times when games would be ported to Switch, you said you were fine with what you got, but now you debate in favour of 30fps over 60, which is what seems off when seeing this kind of knowledge being used.

Yes I know you keep saying one needs to be better than the other or it all falls back, but that's not really a concern as much for those running their own hw as much as it is a concern for those creating a closed plastic box.

Well of course, because Nintendo chose to within reasons of their own. They had up to 3 choices of chips at the time, but they went with the first, being likely to stay within budget, with little concern on big or raw power.

I pick things up, mostly from reading/asking/listening to those who know more about it than I do like the Digital Foundry guys, CGI, Pemalite, etc.

I'm not actually saying one is better than the other, and I acknowledge that I'm talking about the closed box environment of consoles simply because that's where I play. (As do tens of millions of others)

I appreciate the smooth 60fps of games like Splatoon, Ori, and Mario Odyssey, I just also appreciate that 30fps allows for games like BOTW on Wii U, Witcher 3 on Switch, and other games that wouldn't have been possible on their target hardware at 60.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 30 May 2021

Pemalite on 05 June 2021
Chazore said:
curl-6 said:

I already said not every dev will necessarily utilize it, but a game like BOTW on Wii U could never have been made if 60fps was the minimum allowed, same for other games that are pushing the CPU hard.

World simulation can refer to all manner of moving parts and systemic elements with the world, from wind to traffic to crowds to wildlife.

I'd love to see AI improved myself, though I was referring more to the number of AI entities that can be processed per scene than to their routines specifically, but the fact remains that 30 vs 60 is not just a matter of graphics, your CPU as well as GPU has to run at 16.67ms per frame to hit 60, which allows for only half as much processing time as 33.33ms/30fps.

Where did such knowledge of you come from Curl?.

You've never been this sophisticated and well versed in game design and AI tasks/usage.

But again, what about the sacrifices that are made to games being ported from PC to the Switch, which have been running at 60fps on PC?, like sim games for example.

He's not wrong though.

60fps vs 30fps is "frames per second". - The less Frames per second you have, the longer you have to process stuff... Which is frame times.

At 60fps you have exactly 16.67ms to get everything ready.
At 30fps you have exactly 33.33ms to get everything ready.

And now with the push to 120fps we need to have everything ready in 8.3ms.

So every single effect you add to a game costs you frame time in terms of ms.

Say for example you build a game and you have it all up and running nicely, but your frame time budget is sitting at roughly 20ms... But you would like to improve image quality some more. - That means you have 3.33ms of frame time to play with... Which consequently will mean you can now add in TSAA at a cost of 1.5ms of frame time and still get some free overhead.

Frame times is the time you have until you process a frame, it's essentially a different unit of measurement compared to framerate... Aka. Amount of Frames over time.

Things can get allot more complicated than this, but it's the general idea.





www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Alby_da_Wolf on 06 June 2021

If my monitor supported it, my GPU could reach 200fps on Morrowind, but on more recent games I'm lucky to reach 30fps!



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!   


VAMatt on 06 June 2021

30 FPS is acceptable, but I much prefer 60.