Sony PlayStation 5 Pro

[Cappuccino]

Most impressive looking console game so far - Hellblade 2 - is 30 fps only. Smash hit Starfield only launched with a 30 fps mode, though a 60 fps mode was added later (though it can drop as low as 40fps in heavy parts of cities).

Has been a pretty good generation for 60 fps titles so far though. Probably the best since we had sprite based systems.

Calling Starfield a smash hit is a bit of a stretch, it launched to extremely lukewarm fan reception. Scored okay in reviews though. And it has a 60 fps mode now anyways (and tbh the idea that Zen2 couldn’t push 60 in this glorified Fallout 4 mod was always silly, this was just Bethesda being incompetent).

Hellblade 2 I forgot was 30 fps only but makes sense. Tbh I’m not sure movie-games like that need to be any higher.

But in the games where it matters they hit 60 pretty consistently in games that are decently made. In fact, I’d even say this is a good gen for 120 fps! The fact that I can finally run shooters at 120 fps is nice and popular shooters do seem to hit this target (CoD comes to mind).

 

[function]

Calling Starfield a smash hit is a bit of a stretch, it launched to extremely lukewarm fan reception. Scored okay in reviews though. And it has a 60 fps mode now anyways (and tbh the idea that Zen2 couldn’t push 60 in this glorified Fallout 4 mod was always silly, this was just Bethesda being incompetent).

Starfield was one of the best selling games of the year, and given that it didn't launch on Playstation or Switch that's quite something. Even with months of optimisation the game is still not 60fps in cities.

It's a pity that 40 and 50 fps modes aren't common in tvs as more flexibility with target frame rates would be nice.

BTW is there any confirmation that the PS5 Pro will have a NPU for PSSR? Or is it looking like it's going to be done using normal compute shaders?

 

[Seanspeed]

Starfield was one of the best selling games of the year

I dont think it was.

And it certainly wasn't a critical hit, which is usually part of what would be considered a 'smash' success.

"Oh but Gamepass", well this, along with all the muddiness of tracking physical vs digital sales and whatnot has made reliable sales data nearly impossible to come across unless the dev/pub brags about it. Which Bethesda/MS has not done, and that to me indicates it probably didn't sell so massively well, especially given the expectations.

Though I dont think any of this has anything to do with performance at all. Starfield's sales were not held back by lack of a 60fps mode. Starfield would have been a smash hit if it was simply an amazing game, even at 30fps. Console gamers dont care nearly as much about 60fps as they think they do. They'll happily devour a 30fps game if it's the only option and it's good.

Speaking of which, do we know if Star Wars Outlaws will be 60fps on console?

It's also worth bringing up again that one of the main complaints about 60fps modes on more demanding console games is the large hit to image quality. It's pretty much gonna be the main selling point of the PS5 Pro - getting the higher performance while not having to play at like 1080p or something.

 

[Cappuccino]

Starfield was one of the best selling games of the year, and given that it didn't launch on Playstation or Switch that's quite something. Even with months of optimisation the game is still not 60fps in cities.

It's a pity that 40 and 50 fps modes aren't common in tvs as more flexibility with target frame rates would be nice.

BTW is there any confirmation that the PS5 Pro will have a NPU for PSSR? Or is it looking like it's going to be done using normal compute shaders?

I don’t think Starfield was the best selling game of the year, and even if it was that doesn’t indicate success. Most were fairly disappointed with it.

 

[function]

I dont think it was.

And it certainly wasn't a critical hit, which is usually part of what would be considered a 'smash' success.

"Oh but Gamepass", well this, along with all the muddiness of tracking physical vs digital sales and whatnot has made reliable sales data nearly impossible to come across unless the dev/pub brags about it. Which Bethesda/MS has not done, and that to me indicates it probably didn't sell so massively well, especially given the expectations.

Though I dont think any of this has anything to do with performance at all. Starfield's sales were not held back by lack of a 60fps mode. Starfield would have been a smash hit if it was simply an amazing game, even at 30fps. Console gamers dont care nearly as much about 60fps as they think they do. They'll happily devour a 30fps game if it's the only option and it's good.

I don't know about console sales, but on Steam it was one of the top sellers by revenue, and one of the top games by concurrent players. This is just on Steam, despite the game also being on Gamepass.

https://store.steampowered.com/sale/BestOf2023?tab=1

It was literally, verifiably a massive hit. I'm not too bothered about what critics thought - most smash hit entertainment is critically maligned or at least treated with ambivalence. A critically acclaimed flop is still a flop.

In the US, it just made it into the top 10 overall sales despite not releasing on the two biggest selling consoles, with Playstation typically being a strong market for Bethesda.

https://gamerant.com/best-selling-games-2023-activision-blizzard/

This is getting off topic though, Starfield criticism and Gamepass figures are for other threads. It's simply to say that the game was a smash hit, and that it very, very publicly launched on console as a 30fps only game. Most sales were achieved before 40 and 60 fps modes were even announced.

I don’t think Starfield was the best selling game of the year, and even if it was that doesn’t indicate success. Most were fairly disappointed with it.

I didn't say it was the best selling game of the year. High sales and high revenue are good indicators of success.

 

[XboxKING]

Starfield in that case is one of the worst received, supposed ‘best stelling’ titles, in modern history. Would you agree on that?
I think it diminished the value of gamepass

 

[function]

Starfield in that case is one of the worst received, supposed ‘best stelling’ titles, in modern history. Would you agree on that?
I think it diminished the value of gamepass

I think that's well outside the scope of this thread, the relevant thing is that while 30fps only games are rare now, they do exist, and Starfield was one for months and when it was racking up it's initial sales.

PS5 Pro has a very limited CPU bump, and only then if you surrender a little GPU boost headroom. If games start to move to 30fps only on PS5 due to the CPU, Pro won't be able to do anything to change that.

 

[Nesh]

I think that's well outside the scope of this thread, the relevant thing is that while 30fps only games are rare now, they do exist, and Starfield was one for months and when it was racking up it's initial sales.

PS5 Pro has a very limited CPU bump, and only then if you surrender a little GPU boost headroom. If games start to move to 30fps only on PS5 due to the CPU, Pro won't be able to do anything to change that.

Can we really use Starfield as an example? Hellblade 2 and Starfield are just two games among a huge amount of games released.

Games from Bethesda aren't exactly well known for being optimized and pushing new standards in the visual department. It is even a buggy mess It's success has less to do with its visual output and more with its exploration and freedom. If we are using market "success" as an argument where do we put Hellblade 2 which had less success but clearly pushes visuals beyond Starfield's?

 

[function]

Can we really use Starfield as an example? Hellblade 2 and Starfield are just two games among a huge amount of games released.

I was specifically referring to the comment by Cappuccino that "I can’t think of a notable game that doesn’t run at 60 fps at least on the current gen consoles."

"I can't think of a single example"
"Here are two examples"
"But those are just examples!!"

It was an invitation for examples, and I've said repeatedly that it's been a great generation for 60 fps games.

Games from Bethesda aren't exactly well known for being optimized and pushing new standards in the visual department. It is even a buggy mess It's success has less to do with its visual output and more with its exploration and freedom. If we are using market "success" as an argument where do we put Hellblade 2 which had less success but clearly pushes visuals beyond Starfield's?

Yeah but it's still a game that launched with only a 30 fps mode, had most of its sales before a 60 fps mode was announced, and even now falls well bellow 60 fps in reality in some busy areas.

I was only using Starfield's sales to highlight the fact you can't ignore it even if you don't like it. Gamers haven't ignored it, and most of them bought it before a 60 fps mode was announced.

When Starfield inevitably comes to PS5 Pro it won't have a stable 60 fps mode on PS5 Pro either, unless there's a lot of further optimisation work on the software side, because the CPU simply won't have the grunt.

I mean, the dude said he couldn't think of a single example, so I gave examples, but Starfield is seemingly a very divisive titles because people are trying to move the conversation over to:

- it didn't sell well
- critics didn't like it
- Gamepass?
- It has devalued Gamepass
- Bethesda don't optimise well, and it's buggy

Some of which may be true (and some of which isn't), but it launched on console with only a well publicised (and highly criticised) 30 fps mode, had most of its sales with that being the case, and months later finally got a 60 fps mode that is sometimes closer to 30 than 40.

Less than optimal games happen, but it doesn't stop those games from existing and being relevant to gamers.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What has any of this to do with PS5Pro's technology?

 

[function]

What has any of this to do with PS5Pro's technology?

Almost nothing. Which is why I keep trying to separate out the fact that 30 fps games have actually been a thing this gen - albeit a very small one, but with one high selling example - from the seemingly unstoppable sharing of opinion about and around Starfield.

Someone said they couldn't think of a single 30 fps game. I said that there have actually been a couple, and that the PS5 Pro's CPU couldn't change anything in respect to e.g. Starfield.

Starfield existing, having done very well even with only a 30 fps mode, and Pro not being meaningfully faster on the CPU side than Xbox/PS5 is the only thing relevant to this thread. And 30 fps isn't even something I brought up.

Nothing else matters - Gamepass, critics, Bethesda. That's not something that is within the scope of this thread.

 

[Cappuccino]

Someone said they couldn't think of a single 30 fps game. I said that there have actually been a couple

I didn't say 'single', I said 'notable'. I don't consider Starfield notable as it didn't end up being a long-term relevant game. When looking back on this generation nobody is going to be thinking of 30 fps Starfield, they will think of 120 fps CoD, or something along those lines.

Overall I think we agree, this is the generation where 60 fps is really the baseline standard with few notable deviations. 120 fps seems more common than 30 fps only games.

 

[davis.anthony]

120fps COD...

MOD: gif redacted. Please edit this post and express yourself with words so we all know what you are talking about.

 

[Cappuccino]

120fps COD...

View attachment 11790

I don’t get this sentiment at all. It runs at 120 fps. It might dip in extremely busy scenes or in Warzone but overall it usually stays above 100.

 

[Charlietus]

I didn't say 'single', I said 'notable'. I don't consider Starfield notable as it didn't end up being a long-term relevant game. When looking back on this generation nobody is going to be thinking of 30 fps Starfield, they will think of 120 fps CoD, or something along those lines.

Overall I think we agree, this is the generation where 60 fps is really the baseline standard with few notable deviations. 120 fps seems more common than 30 fps only games.

Oops, quoted the wrong post

 

[Charlietus]

120fps COD...

MOD: gif redacted. Please edit this post and express yourself with words so we all know what you are talking about.

Running at 120 99% of the time isn't enough to be called a 120 mode. Damn, tough crowd.

 

[davis.anthony]

Running at 120 99% of the time isn't enough to be called a 120 mode. Damn, tough crowd.

There are multiple videos that show it can be consistently well below 120fps.

So nothing to do with being a tough crowd and all about being honest and saying it as it is.

 

[davis.anthony]

I don’t get this sentiment at all. It runs at 120 fps. It might dip in extremely busy scenes or in Warzone but overall it usually stays above 100.

So it's not 120fps then.

120fps is 120fps, it's not 100fps, or 85fps, or even 115fps, it's 120fps.

It's not a difficult concept to understand.

 

[Charlietus]

There are multiple videos that show it can be consistently well below 120fps.

So nothing to do with being a tough crowd and all about being honest and saying it as it is.

I played this game a year ago for a while, and the only spot in the map that dropped minor frames consistently was the swampy area with the cargo boat.

It's 120 fps with occasional minor frames dropped. Because if this can't be considered 120 than we have no 120 games on console and just a couple "true" 60 fps games. Which sounds absurd.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So it's not 120fps then.

Virtually no game is 100% locked to a framerate, and absolutely everyone uses the ballpark framerate number for a game to understand its framerate. That'll then be qualified as necessary with deviation. There's no IEEE standard for what proportion of time needs to be at a given framerate to qualify the whole game at that framerate, so just relax and accept a bit of leeway or else discussion will be impossible.