60fps will never be the industry standard

the only way its going to become a standard is if the big 3 put the foot down and absolutely demand 60FPS on all games released on their platform. as in it hits 60FPS or the game is delayed until it does. thats never going to happen. ever.

its not a hardware issue. its a policy issue. there is not a single piece of modern gaming hardware on the market today that can't do 60FPS. everything from the 3DS to the mightiest PC can hit that mark. but developers have to commit to that metric from very early in development because hitting it consistently requires cuts to be made elsewhere.

should it be required across the board or should we just let developers make the call themselves?

@ArchoNils2 said:

@calvincfb said:

Besides, PC gamers don't even buy that many games.

stopped reading there. You either are a troll or badly informed.

"Console" includes handhelds. So all consoles and all handhelds together barely beat PC, both being totally destroyed by PC.

NewZoo also includes VR with consoles as well, including Vive and OR.

I would honestly take 30 locked over 60 most of the time. 30 has a cinematic feel to me, where 60 looks unnatural.

Poor Calvin alt troll.

Bitter about not having 60 FPS enough to make a thread and argue nonsense.

So sad :( ....

What the heck does that even mean? I don't know whether to ask questions to work out where the hell you came up with the idea that 60fps (I run games even higher, I'll even drop resolutions to do so) is unnatural or just lol at the bizarreness of your comment.

I thought gaming was supposed to be about having fun. Yes, FPS can be important, and yes for certain genres (especially the ones with PvP emphasis) it's very necessary, but for single player experiences, I truly believe a stable locked 30 is fine if the visual fidelity is boosted as a tradeoff. Gamers nowadays forget how little frames mattered in the past and only came to prominence with the rise of online gaming. I don't deny its significance, but to tout it as a be-all-end-all, I think you should probably take a step back and not be so offended just because a game may not have it.

It's like flat-earth level s*it... they heard it once, and just agree with it to have an argument.

More cinematic... christ.

@Johnny-n-Roger: do you really believe PC master race is not niche? Lol, that's the funniest thing I've read in a games forum in a long time.

No, PC gaming is not niche market. Try again.

@Johnny-n-Roger: I'm not talking about pc gamers in general, but PC master race.

Those that are fps and ultra high settings whore.

They're niche af.

"niche af" - cringe. You're that type of person.

You're using the obscure qualification "PC master race" so that you can disqualify any PC gamer that doesn't meet your arbitrary criteria and allow you to make a numbers argument. How desperate can you be. PC gaming isn't niche, and most PC gamers don't settle for 30 fps because they don't have to.

@Johnny-n-Roger: lol, you're really delusional and butthurt, so funny. It doesn't change the fact that fps and ultra high whores are niche

@ArchoNils2: I mean, really, console and PC need to join forces...

...to destroy filthy ultracasual mobiles (phone games)!

We should not be fighting eachother, my brothers and sisters! Make peace, so we can make war on our true enemy!

Meanwhile, 144 fps is the standard on PC.

PC = for hardcore gamers

Consoles = for casuals

Mobile = for ultra casuals

@UssjTrunks: more or less. Though I don't think you need to be "hardcore" on PC, more of an "enthusiast" but tomatoh tomatah

Console games don't run at 60 fps because they can't run at 60 fps.

Nice "No true Scotsmen" you've done there.

Anyway, now all you need to try and prove is that PC Gamers, not PC Master Racers don't prefer 60fps or already game at 60fps.

Gimme access to the settings. I'll make it run at 60fps.

Of course we don't get that option because devs are too worried people will complain about too many options or 'why does my game look like crap' or 'why does my game run like crap', etc....

No the CPU's in the current consoles just simply can't do 60fps in most modern games with any settings, people tend to forget how regardless of settings low ipc low clockspeed CPU's (Jaguar arch 1.6-2.3 GHz depending on the console) just can not reach high framerates.

You really have no idea how easy it is to get 60fps and more with ultra settings on a PC do you? Here's a clue, a GTX 1060 (similar to the X1X GPU) can do it with most games at 1080p, hell it can do it at 1440p.

It's a standard for PC not some lofty goal only attainable by the few.

@GarGx1: and how much do you think it costs to have this gpu with a good motherboard and processor? Not cheap. Hence, you're still niche.

@howmakewood: Destiny plays fantastic so I'm not sure what the lol is for?

Cheaper than you think. Your arguments are from 2001 and it's painfully obvious your new here.

Of course it will become a industry standard. there is no reason for it not to with the ever evolving hardware. Consoles are improving, pc are improvging and so are mobile devises. Its not an if its a when.

It's a niche that has more users than any single console available today. (and that's just using low estimations through the steam survey)

only nerds care about that stuff, ma and pa don't care when they are buying little Timmy his games.

GTX 1060: $299

Ryzen R3 2200: $99

A320 Motherboard: $49

8 GB DDR4 RAM: $85

400W PSU: $49

Case: $49

HDD: $49

Total: $679

But that isn't the point of PC gaming. Why would you try to imitate console performance? For $1200 you can build a computer that runs 144 fps, ultra graphics. That's the advantage of PC gaming. Consoles can't come even close to competing with high end gaming PCs.

True 24 fps and 240p is the new standard for console/handheld gaming.

3DS ftw.

That's not just to simply "imitate console performance," unless we're assuming that everyone owns a PS4 Pro or XBOX One X. Even then, you're not merely "imitating" any existing console; you're outperforming them in certain cases.

Since this guy wants to make a retarded point like "high end gaming PC's are niche" then we need to look at what hardware a typical console gamer is using, and its the piece of shit standard XBOX One and PS4s. The configuration you've specified is 4 times as powerful as what your typical gamer is using if we're to reasonably assuming that they own a typical console.

The only reason 60 fps isn't standard is because developers prefer to advertise visual quality over frame rate to masses that don't know any better. This guy wants to try to convince everyone that he's made a conscious decision to not care about 60 FPS when the reality is that he doesn't have a choice. Most people that can choose between 30 FPS or a higher FPS will choose a higher FPS because it's mechanically superior.

Fortunately gaming PCs exist, and we don't have to deal with terrible 30 fps.

Oh and PC has more sales than all 3 consoles combined, and more gamers.

What is an aspect of video games that we can say is "industry standard"?

@calvincfb: Oh hai Gio.

LOL , I smell butt hurt because some people cannot achieve 60 fps

@UssjTrunks: I really rather traveling than spending 1200 bucks on a PC

@Johnny-n-Roger: finally someone who admits only PC master race trolls and fps whores care about fps.

Great. Some people can do both.

@UssjTrunks: true, but most can't, hence, high end PC gaming still niche.

@xantufrog: not really, this isn't about console vs PC, it's about how irrelevant 60fps is.

He means that real life moves at 30 fps for him. *snickers*

NO.

Frame rate is much more important than graphics. A low frame rate is very distracting and takes away immersion. This is particularly noticeable in games where you are moving the viewpoint around like FPS or games that let you rotate the camera and pan around the environments. Higher frame rate not only increases immersion, but it improves the overall feel of the game with more responsive controls and visual feedback, better graphics rendering with less blur and artifacts, smoother animation, and less eye strain.

I like graphics as much as the next guy, but not at the sacrifice of frame rate. Of course frame rate is only part of the equation as frame timing/pacing also has a big impact on the perception of the frame rate. A game like Bloodborne when running at a steady 30fps (not good to begin with) gives the illusion like it dips even further and stutters due to poor frame timing. This can even happen on games that are 60fps and over. So, you need a good frame rate and frame timing to get a quality experience.

Having a steady frame rate also makes a huge difference. 60fps is obviously better than 30fps, but if a game can not maintain a stable 60fps, it is better off rendering at a stable 30fps. That way you don't have to put up with tearing, judder and noticeable slowdown. Tech like G-Sync and FreeSync definitely helps with fluctuating frame rates and generally holds the immersion as long as you don't dip too low.

Well, to be fair, it's not nearly as noticeable or as much of an eyesore when using thumbsticks to aim. It's 10 times worse with a mouse if you're stuck at 30 fps vs 60 fps. But yeah, it is still a little noticeable on consoles, especially when some games can't reach a steady frametime like Battlefield 1; it's downright jarring and near the point of unplayable then.

Actually, funny thing, I tried the xbone controller on the PC version of Battlefield 1 and it feels incredible compared to the console experience--a night and day difference. It might actually be kind of fun playing the console version if it played that smoothly.

Sad. I remember when fun used to sell games. Fun gameplay or engaging story.

@DragonfireXZ95: Due to the precision nature of mouse control over analog sticks, poor frame rate becomes that much more apparent and painful. I wouldn't want to play Battlefield or any other FPS with a controller over mouse and keyboard. Sure, it is playable, but it is such a downgrade and inferior experience.

You mean to tell me gaming is ruled by a bunch of shallow graphics whores? Shocking. I already knew that from how extremely static environments are and how people are always claiming so many old games have aged poorly and aren't fun ANYMORE and from how frequently people get new graphics cards and from all the talk of 4K, a ridiculous, unnecessary resolution for gaming. OF COURSE they favor 30 fps.

@davillain- said:

@stuff238 said:

I actually hate the 60 FPS MGSV version. I found it too difficult.

I prefer the 30 FPS MGSV PS3 Version.

Yeah bro. Big Boss moves too fast on PS4. It's too smooth. The enemies seem to also move faster and smoother. I found it much more difficult.

On PS3, Everything is slowed down to 30FPS which is way easier to play the game on. I can actually line up my shots.