Next-gen has to mass-transition to 60fps

#1
This current 8th generation of consoles is ultimately CPU bottle-necked due to Jaguar being the only viable choice.
Despite these limitations however there has been, I feel, an uptick in push for 60fps as we can see from Metal Gear Solid 5 to Resident Evil 7 to Halo 5 & many more. There is wider recognition that games simply play better at a smoother framerate (with a likely wake-up call being the massive success of COD last gen leap-frogging its genre competitors). However there are those developers who have stuck with 30fps due to certain ambitions as there's no way you could i.e. drastically raise the level for human visuals as seen in TLoU2 while doing 60. Not with a Jaguar baseline & a mere handful of TFLOPS at least. Having reached that level however I think it's time to put the focus back on performance come next-gen and these are the reasons why:
  • Silicon-based processor technology has reached a plateau & we've seen this in the PC landscape for a handful of years now. Next-gen consoles will catch up in good fashion in 2019/2020 with a massive CPU jump thanks to Ryzen & likely the Raven Ridge APU being the new baseline that defines the 9th generation. However Moore's law has ended and there's no free-rides on the horizon following this making it crucial to do the transition!
  • Since the middle of last-gen there has appeared many battle-tested software approaches in maintaining framerate such as Dynamic Resolution & more advanced LOD techniques. These have now become more common practice & more readily available.
  • HDMI 2.1 arriving in 2018 will bring variable-framerate-sync to the mass market. Missing that 60fps target occasionally will no longer be a cause for concern as your display adapts accordingly with no tearing in sight. Developers can now dare to push higher instead of locking it down to 30. Input lag will also be kept to a bare minimum.
  • 4K will remain good enough for a long while. At 60fps, checkerboard 4K and its temporal resolution is arguably more than good enough for a long while. Despite intervals shortening between screen-uptake in higher resolutions statistically it is however my impression that there's not much if any developer buy-in for going past 4K render target in the next decade as GPU resources are better spent elsewhere. Hollywood movies for example are still being mastered in 2K-4K.
  • With a higher framerate target, having additional VR support will become drastically easier. Double up like Resident Evil 7 did by offering both a great 2D & VR game in the same package.
  • Again: VR & AR and all the relevant technology pushes & innovations.
  • The TV & Movie industry has been stuck in the 24hz rut for decades despite a few valiant efforts and it's hard to push out of it due to the current ecosystem. Don't let this happen to the interactive medium!
  • AAA game asset-creation costs are already outrageous.
  • Most importantly: Games just downright play better. If you want players to hang onto your GaaS extravaganza then this is one of your most important tickets. I also think the general uninformed public definitely DO appreciate 60fps through "this game is awesome and I want to play more" without being able to point it out directly while still spreading positive word of mouth.
What say you?
I'm not saying a strict 60fps mandate, but just a general heavy PR & cultural push.

Surely this is good enough fidelity
 
Last edited:
#5
It's not going to happen, ever. Advertising "4k" means a lot more to consumers than "60hz".

I assume there will be more options for games as consoles become more and more like PC's, but then I ask, for all console players who are so die hard about 60fps, why not jump to PC where 60fps is only the beginning?
 
#8
It’s not going to happen. I’ve been hearing these please or expectations since the PS2 era. Gamers in general will always favor improved visuals over 60fps. And 60fps is just not a sellable bullet point

Your best hope is to hope what Nioh and other games introduces where they let you choose between the two becomes standard.
 

Secretofmateria

Self Requested 3 Month Ban
Member
#9
Hopefully by that point the cpu needed to make that possible on top of meeting lofty visual expectations are more affordable, you cant put out a potentially 600 dollar or more console
 
#10
They need to make the CPUs more powerful to get better framerate and better AI, two things that have been lacking this gen and could show larger improvements than graphics.
 
Last edited:
#15
60 fps is better but big companies will mostly push hardware as far as it can for the best visuals which will mean a lot of games at 30 fps which people do find acceptable even if 60 is better. It's easier to market a games graphics then it is to market a game as being 60fps.
 

Stuart

Banned
Member
#16
I agree. There's no excuse for any title to run at 30fps, just lower graphical fidelity until you hit the 60fps target. Games are created to be played, not for watching shiny cutscenes.

It's shocking that PS4 Pro and Xbox One X are aiming for psuedo 4k. If Sony or Microsoft had guaranteed 60fps or your game will fail certification, they would have received my money.
 
#17
The percentage of 60 fps games may get higher but I remain skeptical that it will become commonplace. Even in PC threads you see folks here with the option of low graphics at 60fps or jacked graphics at 30fps going with 30 (depending on the game type, of course). We like our games pretty.
 

JEFFREY GRUBB

GamesBeat.com reporter
Verified
#18
My next-gen console has already made this transition -- it's called the Nintendo Switch*. (*You can only play Nintendo games ... but not Zelda)
 
#20
You know this won't happen because good graphics are marketable and framerate isn't. At least not in comercials.
It's not going to happen, ever. Advertising "4k" means a lot more to consumers than "60hz".

I assume there will be more options for games as consoles become more and more like PC's, but then I ask, for all console players who are so die hard about 60fps, why not jump to PC where 60fps is only the beginning?
I think the audience that cares about games generally knows about framerate at this point. Even assuming they don't, isn't this kind of interest basically trainable by marketing? It's not like consumers innately know / care about what "4k" or "megapixels" are, they are told they should care. I don't think doing that with framerate is unreasonable.
 
#25
It's shocking that PS Pro and Xbox One X are aiming for psuedo 4k. If Sony or Microsoft had guaranteed 60fps or your game will fail certification, they would have received my money.
If these boxes had the CPUs to guarantee 60fps they would cost a lot more than $400 to $500. A lot more.
 
#27
I'd rather they focus on native 4K instead. I have a PC and 144hz monitor if I want high fps, and a focus on 60fps would just make assets look shittier across the board.

PS4 Pro being a 1440p machine is far more disappointing to me than the lack of 60fps upgrades.
 
#28
Yup, ridiculous to me that higher resolutions are already being pushed when 1080p60 isn't even close to the norm yet (on consoles.)
 
Last edited:
#30
Other than "Image quality sells, FPS does not" I think the huge explosion of off-the-shelf game engines also is hurting 60 fps games becoming the norm. It is much harder to optimize a general purpose engine than an in-house one and when something's got to give most big AAA publishers will probably say drop the 60 fps.
 

Casual

Banned
Member
#31
Yeah. I'll give it to Nintendo. Of all the areas that they're very behind, they're way ahead of the curve with FPS.

Other devs will mostly always prioritize graphics because you can market that.
 

prostheticHead

Alt Account
Member
#32
I think for this to happen people have to deal with the fact some people will be running multiplayer at 30fps and some people 60fps (just like on PC) as I don't think the 2 power tier of consoles are going away.
 

WONK

Banned
Member
#34
Games could be running on nuclear supercomputers with unlimited processing power and we'd still get sub 30 fps games.
You can't market fps to people who don't understand or see the immediate difference.
 
#35
Although I understand the appeal of this shift for the consumer, doesn't this put an excessive burden on the game development companies?

It's my understanding that High Res development has been a prime factor in crunch and financial instability in AAA development, won't this sort of thing make all of that worse?
 
#36
I'd rather they focus on native 4K instead. I have a PC and 144hz monitor if I want high fps, and a focus on 60fps would just make assets look shittier across the board.

PS4 Pro being a 1440p machine is far more disappointing to me than the lack of 60fps upgrades.
Good point.
Keep the 30fps on consoles and put graphics to max!
 
#39
I sure hope so OP. As someone who only plays on consoles I sure envy PC gamers who get to play games like Destiny 2 and Overwatch at 60fps or higher.

It's not even debatable, games running at 60 just feel better to play.
 
#41
If you want 60fps, you better pray that VR become more wide spread. Because other than fighting games, VR is the only thing in the gaming industry that is actually forcing game developers to increase frame rates.
 
#43
Yeah. I'll give it to Nintendo. Of all the areas that they're very behind, they're way ahead of the curve with FPS.

Other devs will mostly always prioritize graphics because you can market that.
Is Zelda BotW not a Nintendo title or am I missing something?
 

Coolwhip

Banned
Member
#46
Its harder to do 60fps, look at all the optimisations in Mario Odyssey.

Options would be great, 60 and 30 fps mode. But that will probably add cost to development again.
 
#47
I would like to think this will be the generation it happens because it's going to be necessary for VR. It's also what would be the biggest different between this gen and the next. Graphics are really starting to look amazing all the time. While resources could be spent there to improve them more, I think diminishing returns will be very real next generation, especially when development cost is really becoming an issue.
 
#48
I've come to accept that, for console developers on console, graphics will always come first. As others have said, you can't sell framerate. "4K" looks great on your ads and people eat the latest buzzword for breakfast.

Maybe we can get 60 FPS for PS4/XBO remasters next gen, though.
 
#49
The latest video game commercial (Assassin's Creed Origins) on TV uses CG instead of in-game graphics.
And? Starwars Battlefront II wasn't. 60 fps is still something only people on forums and some people who just love that kind of stuff talk about, the average consumer doesn't give a damn. 4K is a way bigger buzzword.

I think the audience that cares about games generally knows about framerate at this point. Even assuming they don't, isn't this kind of interest basically trainable by marketing? It's not like consumers innately know / care about what "4k" or "megapixels" are, they are told they should care. I don't think doing that with framerate is unreasonable.
Being interested in games and buying games aren't the same thing, sadly. It's the same reason why publishers get away with microtransactions in $60 dollar games.
Of course that is trainable by marketing. Said marketing simply has no interest in conveying the message that 60 fps is important though. Maybe because there are no additional 4k monitors to sell, at least in Sony's case.
Most publishers just go with the flow, and the flow consists of resolution talk and nice visuals.
 
Top