The Cost of 120 FPS on the New Consoles? Resolution. And It's UGLY

We are seeing resolutions like 810p on Titanfall 1 and 2, 972p for Battlefield 1 and 1080p for Battlefield 5. I knew there would be compromises, but this much? Yikes!

Who, aside from dedicated PC gamers, care about 120fps for anything? 30fps is good for most games except the most demanding fast input games, and 60fps is good for those on consoles.

120fps is just nerdy, PC propaganda against console gaming.

Nothing in universe is free. Everything has pros and cons, costs and benefits.

Personally, though, 60 fps will do for me.

@goldenelementxl: Just think how much worse it would be on the PS5

Well they don't even support the feature for the most part, so theres something else to be said about the PS5...

I think you're confused

Putting aside from consoles, practically speaking, new GPUs that can do 4K reliably are pricey.

On a personal note, I prefer frames to fidelity. I think it was Jim Leonard from the demoscene who said it best: humans are conditioned to prefer frequency over amplitude. In practical terms, we generally prefer smooth motion with less detail over pretty slideshows. His example basically used a 24-bit video with 2.5 fps versus a black and white one at 30fps, and the smoother video was easier to recognize as a walk cycle. The same principle works for me when it comes to resolution.

No!

Meh. I don’t get all that fussed over resolution and fps myself. I can handle 30fps for the most part just fine so 60fps across the board will be very manageable for me.

60fps is fine. 120fps is good.

30fps lol

Of course you don't when you still use a 1080p TV lol. Upgrade to a good 4K TV and you wouldn't be able to go back.

@NathanDrakeSwag: All in good time. 😎

What about the FPS boost games that went from 30 to 60? I'm much more interested in them (which I assume is the vast majority of the tiny number of people who actually care about this feature)

Still waiting on those graphics settings in console games so I can decide what is important to me......

I agree 60fps should be minimum. I don't care how good you can make it look. 30fps feels bad.

@davillain-: It's true, 30fps is fine for games like turn based rpgs, visual novels, farm sims and puzzle games, for instance.

What's killing me every time i see any resolutions under 1440p is what's supposed to be the gpu equivalent inside the systems. The Series X, for example, has the rtx2080 equivalent (as many has been spamming for so long). Now, what kind of a person with this kind of a gpu will ever play under 1080p on a pc? Literally nobody. I can't think of a single person that will lock its resolution to 810p no matter what. And i bet you that the majority of those who own an rtx2070 or better are playing on a 1440p-4k screen.

You know what consoles need? Access to graphical settings just like the pc. Not only will it help the systems getting to high frames at high resolution, but for competitive games you don't need a bunch of settings set to High. Consoles are already wannabe pc's, so finish the job and give me graphical settings.

You've been reading the wrong posts, apparently.

I find 60 FPS just about okay with HDR and Ray tracing. Still, dlss can get you more.

True true. It has an rtx2080ti equivalent, obviously.

Try RTX 2060 Super...

I think he's being sarcastic.

AMD+RT don't mix together.

AMD and new graphics technologies don't mix. Their DLSS solution will be another disaster

I would take an Nvidia gpu inside a console, but its not like we're able to chose what's given.

60fps is good enough for a controller game.

120 and 120+ are nice to have for fast pace mouse & keyboard games.

coldwar...settings....graphics....120hz.

.enabled....sweeeeet

HAH

@goldenelementxl:

IIRC the way the 120 patch works is more of a hardware application where they "trick" the game... the resolution was not modified from their original resolution

I know Titanfall 2 had a dynamic resolution that would adjust based on the load. Lems were here bragging the One X was running Titanfall 2 at 6K.

Isn't the resolution the same as the original?

You are entitle to your opinion and I respect that. But saying 30fps is fine for games isn't something I would go telling everyone it is. If you think you enjoy playing games in 30fps, that's fine.

It's not just my opinion, it's also the millions of console gamers who don't have a problem with 30fps for games like I described. In fact, I'd say it would be extremely strange and out of character for any of them to complain about something like that. You just don't see it, and there's a reason for that.

So in that context, I'd say that you are entitled to your opinion, but it is a minority opinion.

Anyone who has seen it in action

120 is excessive I agree but I played at 30 fps a while back with some games and it is just god awful with any game. I don't know how anyone can play at that rate unless they've never known anything higher (which, I'm betting, is the case).

Genuinely disappointed in the industry as a whole for hyping 4K/resolutions over an industry-standard 60 fps across the board.

You're sitting there talking about how 30 fps is fine when you should be saying 1080p is fine [as long as you get 60+]

Most console gamers--hell, most gamers-- are "casuals", i.e. people that don't post on here. Most of us post on here because we are a little bit more diehard about our gaming hobby than the average console gamer.

30 fps is fine for people that buy consoles to play Final Fantasy or Halo or one or two other games each year. If you care about gaming at all, however, you should know the importance of a faster framerate and shouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

30 fps at 4K is like buying a 30k dollar car and giving it a 40k dollar paintjob. It's better to have a 70k dollar car with a 0-dollar paint job.

120fps is excessive? We have monitors hitting 360fps...

I think 144fps is my sweet spot because I like turning up the settings. But even 144fps can be hard to hit with enthusiast level hardware

I agree with you about the industry being one big **** up. They always prioritize the most idiotic things and cater the to lowest common denominator.

But again, I'm only saying 30fps is fine with slower genres. Take RPGs for example: Dragon Quest turn based battle system is fine at 30fps, but not a Tales game, for instance.

the only game that makes me want to pull the trigger on a 120hz television is Halo: MCC at 4K/120fps but that alone just isn't enough.. the unfortunate reality is that not many games are going to support 120fps this generation and even then, you're going to typically be looking at big trade-offs in resolution.. smaller games like Ori and the Will of the Wisps and older games like Halo: MCC seem to be the rare exceptions..

for me, 60fps seems to be the sweet spot until new hardware is released..

that said, it's a decent option to play around with for those with televisions that support it..

They do need those options, but manufacturers and publishers (not me) think console gamers are idiots.

Hell, just give the option for performance, mid-range, or high-end presets in games.

Ah I see now. I suppose that's fair, especially if it comes with extra detail.

It was weird that a mod disagreed with that statement but didn't explain why. Is it because he/she doesn't play those genres, or some other unexplained reason? *shrugs*

30fps hasn't been god enough since the rise of LCD where the motion blur is about double that of a CRT at any given frame rate. You have to run twice the frame rate today for games to look as smooth as they were 20 years ago.

@goldenelementxl: Since the Switch is in the same gen as these consoles, how does it run these games at 120fps???

How many FPS do the other consoles get in portable mode, unplugged from the wall and away from the TV? My math may be a little off, but I think the Switch has a FPS advantage here. FPS and resolution.

Funny to think that desks are still the same depth. I guess we got rid of the keyboard tray after getting all that new free space.

lol people defending 30 fps. Raise those standards. That's why you're getting screwed by these companies by releasing underpowered shit.

I'll just continue to enjoy my games 😎

@goldenelementxl: Imagine the Switch running these games at 120fps, it would be like 120p and the characters would look like stick men.

But, but portable, what an obvious and weak deflection by you.

I've said to you plenty of times to stop shitting on current gen hardware (XSX/PS5) unless you add the Switch into the conversation, because as we know once Nintendo released the Switch it started a new generation, so stop the Xbox/Playstation bashing on frames and resolution when the Switch is by FAR the worst in that department, and you only makes yourself look the clown.

Let me guess your rebuttal, but, but portable lol.