• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next gen is here and so are more games at 60 fps. Now what's your call on performance vs quality?

You've tasted next gen console gaming. Now what's your quality/perf opinion?

  • Frame gamer. I'm a 60 fps (or 120) gamer and willingly accept crappier res, RT or shadows

    Votes: 137 47.9%
  • Quality gamer. I'm picking max res, better textures, lighting, RT etc... even if it's 30 fps

    Votes: 28 9.8%
  • Flip flopper. I have no allegiance. Totally depends on the game/genre

    Votes: 121 42.3%

  • Total voters
    286

Retinoid

Member
If I'm on a console then I'll usually take 60fps over any Quality mode simply because of the distance I'm sitting away from my TV. I can notice 30fps vs 60fps regardless of distance, but it becomes harder to notice any bump in resolution or other graphics options when you're sitting on a couch a fair few feet away from the screen.

For PC, I usually just say fuck it and go all out on a build every few years so I can get the best of both worlds - sitting close to a monitor means I can easily notice any aliasing or other artifacts compared to my console set up. So it's 4k 60fps for me on my PC, which is attainable in most games on my Strix 3090.
 
Last edited:
How devs can get around the minimum 33ms of lag from 30fps?
Mortal Kombat X has an input lag of 107ms but it runs at 60fps
The Last of Us Part II has an input lag of 111ms but it runs at 30fps

That's only a 4ms difference. It all depends on how the developer handles the inputs. That's the beauty of console development.

You can get just about the same input response from a 30fps game as a 60fps game.

Edit: Source for my numbers https://displaylag.com/console-latency-exploring-video-game-input-lag/
 
Last edited:

rodrigolfp

Member
Mortal Kombat X has an input lag of 107ms but it runs at 60fps
The Last of Us Part II has an input lag of 111ms but it runs at 30fps

That's only a 4ms difference. It all depends on how the developer handles the inputs. That's the beauty of console development.

You can get just about the same input response from a 30fps game as a 60fps game.

Edit: Source for my numbers https://displaylag.com/console-latency-exploring-video-game-input-lag/
This is devs fucking up things more than others. Never the same game should have close or worse lag at 60 vs 30.
 
Last edited:
This is devs fucking up things more than others. Never the same game should have closer or worse lag at 60 vs 30.
So there goes your theory of 60fps being the king of low input lag. It comes down to the devs.

I have no way to test it, but in Miles Morales, the controls feel just as responsive in 30fps mode as they do in 60fps mode. I don't know how they do it, but they have the ability to optimize the controls to be as fast as possible. Something that's not really done on PC, that's why PC players need the highest frame rates possible because if you artificially cap your frame rate to 30fps, your CPU is starving your GPU so much that too many frames get built up in the buffer causing massive input lag.

Edit: I'm not a dev or an expert on how these things work, I just know that just because a game is 30fps doesn't ALWAYS mean high input lag.
 
Last edited:
The current 60fps situation is what I was hoping the PS4 would bring to the table 😬.

Last gen we got 1080p with an expectation of locked (or very close to locked 30fps) nearly all the time, with some 60fps and a couple of games that suffered from severe performance issues.

The return of 60+ fps 3d gaming on consoles is more than due by now.

Edit: for those begging for 30fps games, why no 15 or 20? Zelda oot was 20 if I'm not mistaken.
 
Last edited:

rodrigolfp

Member
So there goes your theory of 60fps being the king of low input lag. It comes down to the devs.

I have no way to test it, but in Miles Morales, the controls feel just as responsive in 30fps mode as they do in 60fps mode. I don't know how they do it, but they have the ability to optimize the controls to be as fast as possible. Something that's not really done on PC, that's why PC players need the highest frame rates possible because if you artificially cap your frame rate to 30fps, your CPU is starving your GPU so much that too many frames get built up in the buffer causing massive input lag.

Edit: I'm not a dev or an expert on how these things work, I just know that just because a game is 30fps doesn't ALWAYS mean high input lag.
Where did you get "my" theory that 60 is king? The more the better!!! And capping framerate to 30fps on pc while keeping maximum frames ahead = 1 does not cause adicional lag. At least it's what my mouse says.
 
Last edited:
The current 60fps situation is what I was hoping the PS4 would bring to the table 😬.

Last gen we got 1080p with an expectation of locked (or very close to locked 30fps) nearly all the time, with some 60fps and a couple of games that suffered from severe performance issues.

The return of 60+ fps 3d gaming on consoles is more than due by now.

Edit: for those begging for 30fps games, why no 15 or 20? Zelda oot was 20 if I'm not mistaken.
I only want 30fps games to continue because I wanna see a true generational leap in visuals, not just have last gen visuals with more frames. I can't think of a single time last gen where I thought the frame rate got in the way of enjoying a game. The first thing I remember about a game is the story and how good the gameplay and mechanics were, not the frame rate as that's not really something that sticks out in my mind.

Fact of life is: No matter how powerful hardware gets, 30fps will ALWAYS be able to do MORE than 60fps. That's fact.
 

Jaysen

Banned
30fps is lame. If a dev continues to release their games that way, I’ll continue to never buy those games.
 
Where did you get "my" theory that 60 is king? The more the better!!! And capping framerate to 30fps on pc while keeping maximum frames ahead = 1 does not cause adicional lag. At least it's what my mouse says.
You said: "But quality the pixels or quality of frames/input lag/gameplay?"

I assumed you meant EITHER pixel quality or responsiveness and my argument was that 30fps CAN feel just as responsive as a 60fps game if it's done right. I realize that not every dev is the same so your results may vary. Some 60fps games will feel better, but some will be almost the same as 30fps.
 

Zephir

Member
I played Control main story on PS5 with FPS priority and it was amazing, while also being gorgeous...

after I got the platinum trophy I decided to check resolution mode plus ray tracing, with lower framerate...never again, it felt...wrong, and I wasn't even sure those were 30fps, they felt even lower. On the bright side, ray tracing was gorgeous
 

rodrigolfp

Member
You said: "But quality the pixels or quality of frames/input lag/gameplay?"

I assumed you meant EITHER pixel quality or responsiveness and my argument was that 30fps CAN feel just as responsive as a 60fps game if it's done right. I realize that not every dev is the same so your results may vary. Some 60fps games will feel better, but some will be almost the same as 30fps.
30fps can feel as responsive as 60 if something is wrong with that 60fps game (like SFV). If the same game feels the same at 30 vs 60, this game has something very wrong.
 
Last edited:
30fps can feel as responsive as 60 if something is wrong with that 60fps game (like SFV). If the same game feels the same at 30 vs 60, this game has something very wrong.
Not necessarily. Input can be registered at 60Hz, while the game runs at 30. That's what they did for DriveClub too. I can't find the article now for some reason but I remember reading that the inputs are registered at 60hz while the game runs at 30, giving you basically the lowest input lag possible even though the game looks like 30fps.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Not necessarily. Input can be registered at 60Hz, while the game runs at 30. That's what they did for DriveClub too. I can't find the article now for some reason but I remember reading that the inputs are registered at 60hz while the game runs at 30, giving you basically the lowest input lag possible even though the game looks like 30fps.
Humm. Last time I tried DriveClub (near launch) the input lag was terrible.
 
Humm. Last time I tried DriveClub (near launch) the input lag was terrible.
Then something is wrong with your setup. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: Someone really needs to see what the input lag difference is in Spider-Man at 30fps vs 60fps to see the difference and if it's even noticeable.
 
Last edited:

rodrigolfp

Member
Then something is wrong with your setup. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: Someone really needs to see what the input lag difference is in Spider-Man at 30fps vs 60fps to see the difference and if it's even noticeable.
Could be, but I doubt. It's was something like this:


But with a controller, not wheel.
 

skit_data

Member
I think it depends on the game, I had no issues playing TLOU2 in 30fps(not a next gen game, but i played it on PS5), but found both Demon’s Souls and Control UE horrible in 30fps.

It really depends on the type of game, but I seriously hope they keep 60fps an option throughout the generation because in those titles where its good to have 60 fps for gameplay it really improves the experience.
 

Fbh

Member
I'm still in the "60fps is better but 30fps can be fine" camp.
I definitely prefer 60fps for most games, but I still see the appeal in console games really pushing for amazing visuals at the cost of performance, specially if it's not some fast paced action game.

I'll always prefer performance over resolution though (as long as it is at least 1080p). If a game can give me next gen visuals at 60fps and 1080p I'll gladly take that over Ps4 tier visuals at 4K and 60fps.
 

LMJ

Member
I would say this thread is VERY premature lol

We have 4 genuine next gen AAA games thus far (Demons Souls, Returnal, R and C and the Medium) the rest are cross gen

My point is its easy right now to offer 30 or 60 FPS, but as next gen features become more prominent the tradeoff will become substantially more noticeable, that and depending on the demands of the engines a 60 FPS option might not even be viable...
 
Last edited:
I would say this thread is VERY premature lol

We have 4 genuine next gen AAA games thus far (Demons Souls, Returnal, R and C and the Medium) the rest are cross gen

My point is its easy right now to offer 30 or 60 FPS, but as next gen features become more prominent the tradeoff will become substantially more noticeable, that and depending on the demands of the engines a 60 FPS option might not even be viable...
Exactly. I mean we're already seeing tradeoffs to using new tech like ray tracing and as game engines evolve and grow, you'll start to see insanely detailed environments and characters, but it will come at a cost to performance just as it always has for every generation when they try to push the boundaries of graphics.

The people on here are not the main demographic and I'm willing to bet most people playing on consoles don't care about frame rate.
 
The first thing I remember about a game is the story and how good the gameplay and mechanics were, not the frame rate as that's not really something that sticks out in my mind.
Then why the emphasis on "true next gen visuals" a better framerate is part of this, next gen games look and perform better... And most times we have access to a 30fps quality mode.

I honestly think that with the level of hardware that's in these machines the benefits you would get for the sacrifice in how smooth the 60 fps games are compared to those that run at 30 is just not worth it, run the games at 1080p.if you have to, but no 30fps cap for me on that kind of hardware.
 

Giles

Member
I’m firmly in the frame rate camp. 30 FPS feels like a slideshow and is the reason I haven’t even played some games like HZD.

It’s been nice to have the option to choose between visuals and performance this gen. As someone that gamed for years on PC I missed that flexibility. Things like upscaling techniques are so good now that resolution can be dropped without being noticeable and horse power can be allocated to higher frames anyway so it’s a win win.

Let’s just hope the option to choose remains as the gen continues. 🙏🏻
 

Isurus

Member
60 fps all the way. The real debate for me is 60 vs 120, when available. While I use 120 from time to time, the hit to graphics can sometimes be more than I'd desire. Additionally, I tend to notice improvement with 120 more when using a mouse and keyboard instead of a controller.
 

junguler

Banned
it's always been more framerate but if you only played on consoles you didn't have anything to compare that 30 fps to so it wasn't bothering you as much.
 
60 is the bare minimum that should be used in a modern game. I've seen games running at 165fps and after that even 60 looks rough, but 30 just looks awful.

I'll suffer through 30fps if the game itself works with that framerate, JRPGs on the Switch are a good example. Everything else should be 60.
 

Darchaos

Member
I mean i want it both, for example in MS flight sim im totaly fine with 30 fps on Ultra, in outriders i use DLSS to be able to enjoy fine fps and ok graphics, and. When im playaing on consol(PS5) i always go for performance before quality, i actually geting dissy when im trying to play on quality and 30Fps.....im not lying, probably something wrong with me.....Couse it is not happening to me on PC with MS flight sim.
 

GametimeUK

Member
Given normal circumstances using this generation as a base of what visual sacrifices have been made to reach 60fps, I can say I will never choose to game at 30fps. The visual sacrifice for Demon's Souls, Spider-Man Control and more are well justified. The extra visual fidelity that these games have in "graphics" mode (and in Controls and Slider-Man's case the RT is very nice) are just not worth the game running like they're broken.

Funnily enough I have a friend who can't see the difference in framerate on Spider-Man. He only sees the difference in graphics. Ignorance is a bliss I guess as he can enjoy maximum visuals with no perceivable impact to performance.
 
Last edited:

Fare thee well

Neophyte
Once all things have a minimum of 60, the whole issue will be put to bed for me. That being said I run a 120hz ultrawide screen at this second lol. Sky is the limit for my eyes. I can't emphasize how great high refresh rate is for precision in gaming. I just never knew until recently.
 
3rd choice but it's actually wrong cause I don't flipflop, I just prioritise them , depends on the game therefore some I find higher fps works best and some I find 30fps is enough but if the tv supports freesync PP or gsync ultimate whatever works best for low fps games that relys on heavy visual effects.
 

Kuranghi

Gold Member
Anyone on PC who feels 30fps is unplayable needs to check out RTSS's scanline sync feature:


If you fix the lag issue and feel it looks like shit in motion on your display (ie you perceive that its stuttering massively) its because your display isn't good at displaying low fps content. We used to play games at flipping 20 fps not 20 years ago and it didn't feel great ofc but it certainly didnt make me motion sick or whatever crap people say about 30fps
 

Jigsaah

Gold Member
So I was a quality gamer until I got a PC. Now I'm a performance gamer with some caveats. Cyberpunk has placed me firmly in the center where I want the higher resolutions as long as I can get around 90 frames in a non competitive game.

Competitive games like Apex Legends I have to go with a solid 170 fps (Apex tends to stutter for some strange reason if I don't cap the framerate to 170 or below).

It's all about the trade off for me. If I'm gonna do high frame rate, how much of the image quality am I losing?
 
Last edited:

JCK75

Member
I'll almost always go quality for single player unless it's something like Doom
and always go performance for multiplayer.
 

Dream-Knife

Member
Frames all day long. I will say with a controller 60 is fine now, but with a mouse in an FPS I don't want to go sub 120. I can feel a drop now from 170 to 100. I used to 'not be able to tell between 30 and 60'.

That being said I can still play games like Perfect Dark at 15fps.

144+fps 1440p is the correct answer.
 
Last edited:

Raonak

Member
Depends on the game.

If it's a story heavy game I'm usually going for quality. If it's combat heavy, I'll go for frames.

I can adapt to any frame rate personally. It's a great ability to have, because I like seeing how much devs can squeeze hardware. Like I'm probably playing ratchet at 30, because I want to see that in maximin visual quality.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the game.

If it's a story heavy game I'm usually going for quality. If it's combat heavy, I'll go for frames.

I can adapt to any frame rate personally. It's a great ability to have, because I like seeing how much devs can squeeze hardware. Like I'm probably playing ratchet at 30, because I want to see that in maximin visual quality.
Same. I want the hardware completely maxed out, is that so wrong?

When I see a game running at 60fps, then I assume that the system isn't being utilized to it's fullest or that what's on screen just isn't detailed enough if the system can push 60fps no problem.

When I see a game at 30fps, I'm like... okay, now we're talking. Now I can pretty safely assume that since it's only 30fps, they've done everything possible to maximize objects on screen, physics, destruction, weather, lighting, ray tracing or whatever it may be. It's running at 30fps because it has to.

For example. Seeing The Last of Us running on PS3 was an amazing feat, but when I played the same game on PS4 at 60fps, it just didn't look that good anymore. Like technically the graphics were higher quality and the textures were better, but it just seemed really cheesy and ruined that film quality. Not only that, but they completely nerfed the motion blur on the 30fps mode making it feel choppier than the PS3 version even if you wanted to run it in 30fps cinematic mode. Also, the shadows were all screwed up in 30fps mode as well. It was just weird.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom