1080p 30fps VS 720p 60 fps - The 2012 poll

[willardjuice]

Just about any game that I think of, would be benefit a lot from a better framerate at the expense of some tradeoffs in the graphics department.

That eerily sounds like an opinion! Phil, you can rephrase it however you want, but essentially you are forcing your beliefs onto others. Not everyone agrees that cutting graphics in favor of framerate is a "benefit".

And I want to note that I don't necessarily disagree with your observations. I just trust the game developer more than Phil from the internet (nothing personal Phil, I wouldn't trust any of these guys...especially that AlStrong character ).

 

[kache]

They should just put a freaking option in the game to choose between 120/60/30/24fps and make everyonr happy.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I'm a console gamer, so i'm used to what devs come up with for the constraints of the hardware they are working with, and they usually make the right choice.

So i pick number 3.


Although i do wonder if the "compromise" action of 45fps locked is better than either of those?

I did find it nice that Irrational gave Bioshock console gamers an "unlock framerate" option too..

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They should just put a freaking option in the game to choose between 120/60/30/24fps and make everyonr happy.

Except the developers who have to manage assets for 4 different framerates.

Although i do wonder if the "compromise" action of 45fps locked is better than either of those?

That should look rough with every other frame doubled up.

 

[Arwin]

I don't trust developers at all. For every good developer there are many more bad ones, or developers who are forced into crappy decisions by publishers. But I do realise that it's a pipe dream. Also, I have to admit that many games were perfectly playable at 30fps, and some of them are among my all-time favorites. But they would certainly not be worse at 60fps gameplay wise, far from it, and then the jump in graphics that 30fps allows is just a matter of spoiling what you are used to.

Mind you, I highly doubt any of the platform holders these days is in the position to mandate something like this. Therefore I'm just keeping my hope that supporting 3D/split screen at 30fps per eye/player and 60fps for single player mode becomes a near de-facto standard.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

It depends on a game, but in general it would be a terrible sacrifice either way. Fighting, racing or a platformer (inc. Trials) 60 fps all the way. Slower paced, even FPS games I'd probably go for 1080p, but I would be hurting a bit at 30 fps anyway. Joker's answer was good

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Depends on the game!

In many single player focused games I often lean towards 30fps. However, I believe you have to adjust for each game. Plenty of games that work at 24 fps. Depends on the style and pace of the game!

To be honest I think this thread I exaggerated, it's not like there isn't 60 fps games out there.. Hell, cod, the best selling fps franchise in history has always been 60 fps. They clearly believe 60 fps fits their gameplay the best, at the expense of graphics!

Heavy rain - 24 fps and awesome graphics or 60 fps ?

My choice would be 24

 

[joker454]

Heavy rain - 24 fps and awesome graphics or 60 fps ? My choice would be 24

I would have agreed a long time ago. But now I've been gaming at 60fps on pc for so long that dropping to 30fps looks really jarring, I just can't do it anymore. I would not have thought that to be the case as I have argued for 30fps with more graphical fidelty in the past. But to my surprise 30fps just looks so bad to me now irregardless of game genre, and games at that low framerate almost feel as if there is something wrong with them. It's tough to explain, it's almost as if you are walking through cement or that the game is running in slo motion, it just looks and feels all wrong. I'll have to see on the next console generation if I can get retrained back to accept 30fps. Like I said I'm surprised that's happened to me, I really didn't expect that. Even more surprising to me is that I'm now willing to drop graphical features to maintain 60fps, I would have never done that in the past. I guess once you get used to something it's tough to go back.

 

[zed]

you can guarantee next gen 75+% of the games will be at least 1920x1080 @ 60fps

 

[function]

Heavy rain - 24 fps and awesome graphics or 60 fps ?

My choice would be 24

Nooooooooo! 3:2 judder!

Anyone without a 24fps display would be done a wrong 'un.

 

[Arwin]

Depends on the game!

In many single player focused games I often lean towards 30fps. However, I believe you have to adjust for each game. Plenty of games that work at 24 fps. Depends on the style and pace of the game!

To be honest I think this thread I exaggerated, it's not like there isn't 60 fps games out there.. Hell, cod, the best selling fps franchise in history has always been 60 fps. They clearly believe 60 fps fits their gameplay the best, at the expense of graphics!

Yes. And now name me one other 60fps shooter.

Heavy rain - 24 fps and awesome graphics or 60 fps ?

My choice would be 24

Like I said, my primary motive is that graphics are just what you're used to, and lowering framerate to get better graphics just ruins what you're used to .

And 24fps just sucks, always. Even in the cinema.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

you can guarantee next gen 75+% of the games will be at least 1920x1080 @ 60fps

Are you joking? and "at least 1920x1080"?

I'm quite sure we'll see plenty of 30fps games in the future as well.

edit:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/30fps-John-Carmack-Next-Generation-Console-Framerate,19864.html

Carmack's tweet.
“Unfortunately, I can pretty much guarantee that a lot of next gen games will still target 30 fps.”

Based on that and the rumours of next gen tech, I'm so far taking his guarantee more seriously

 

[tuna]

Yes. And now name me one other 60fps shooter.

Name one other shooter that sells in COD numbers.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Compare the totals for 30fps shooters sold versus 60 fps shooters sold.

Lots of different comparisons can be made, none of which really point to any great insight into people's buying habits. COD's success may have nothing to do with 60 fps and everything to do with brand identity. Unless we get another iteration that drops 60 fps and see its sales drop dramatically, we cannot conclude anything from it's number one position.

 

[Arwin]

Name one other shooter that sells in COD numbers.

If anything, that just goes to prove that you cannot trust developers. Even when the most popular fps shows that 60fps is a good thing for playability, all other fps's opt for 30fps, perhaps because they fear they can't compete with anything but graphics, who knows?

EDIT: I'm overlooking Id software's titles, which were also 60fps on consoles.

 

[zed]

Are you joking? and "at least 1920x1080"?
I'm quite sure we'll see plenty of 30fps games in the future as well.

No Im not joking, sure they may dip under 60fps (like COD) but we'll see the majority of games come out at 60fp

 

[tuna]

If anything, that just goes to prove that you cannot trust developers. Even when the most popular fps shows that 60fps is a good thing for playability, all other fps's opt for 30fps, perhaps because they fear they can't compete with anything but graphics, who knows?

EDIT: I'm overlooking Id software's titles, which were also 60fps on consoles.

I know, it is so crazy! EA invested shitloads in their Medal of Honour games in order to compete with COD but the output was the most average modern shooter imaginable. Is it DICE's old boss (Söderlund) that is responsible for shooters at EA? He is not doing a good job as far as I can tell.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

No Im not joking, sure they may dip under 60fps (like COD) but we'll see the majority of games come out at 60fp

What makes you believe that?

 

[Blazkowicz]

I didn't follow the Medal of Honor game, but reading this is funny.
The very first CoD was a Medal of Honor sequel.

 

[zed]

>>What makes you believe that?<<

Simply cause next generation will have the least base graphical upgrades from any of the generations ever.
But the increase of power is roughly gonna be the same.

resolution, colordepth, AA, texture size, vertex count etc

eg
PS2 AA=1x
PS3 AA=2/4 or other methods
PS4 AA=16x!! is this really needed esp when resolution is doubled

PS1 300 polygons for a character
PS2 3000 polygons for a character // prolly closer to 2000
PS3 30000 polygons for a character // prolly closer to 15000
PS4 300000, is this necessary if it doesnt make bugger all difference onscreen // Im guessing prolly ~50k
diminished returns mate.