I don’t do modern consoles, do people consider 30fps acceptable?
The majority of people playing don’t know the difference. I am shocked there won’t be a 60fps mode, i can’t remember the last time I’ve been forced to play at 30fps outside of playing older games locked to it.
I would imagine the game is at the highest possible graphic fidelity for consoles, and also the scale of the game will have a factor.
Remember. Gta V came out 12 years ago. It didn’t run at 60fps on any console until the PS5
Yeah, i know, for myself I didn’t really get to experience it until 2016 when I built myself a PC with mid range specs and then when I got the ps4 pro in like 2018. I say it’s one of those things where once you get to have it, you never wanna go back.
It’s not shocking, when you consider the level of graphical fidelity they’ll be pushing on screen.
The more detail you add, the lower the framerate, on any given hardware. They will be balancing “oh my God!” level graphics, with playable frame rates. The fact they’re shooting for such a relatively low frame rate, shows how hard they’re pushing the hardware.
Absolutely not. I don’t remember the last time I played a game without 60fps performance option on my PS5
Most don’t, the people who say they don’t realize it probably also say that “there’s no difference between 1080p and 4k!”
For most people the further they sit away from a screen the less they are going to notice it. And console gamers play on a tv from the couch. Of course if you show them a 60fps version after they played in 30fps they will notice but most people don’t understand why that is and thus not care. Like how many people watch movies with motion smoothing on since they don’t see that it looks smoother than the movies in the cinema.
Rockstar can get away with this since the vast majority of GTA player will be mainstream casual gamers that only have fifa/madden and CoD in their gaming collection.
Yes, 30fps is fine, and expected even if you’re also expecting ultra realistic graphics. This expectation that people have of games being 60 fps and being stupid realistic is nonsense. You want realistic graphics and reflections when a game is first released, your gonna get 30 fps. And honestly, you can hardly tell the difference anyway.
Edit: Always expect the downvotes when I say this. The people in gaming subs, almost never understand how games are developed. Just demand without understanding the limitations of hardware and software.
Some games go to 120fps and are actually realistic.
GTA was never about realism, it just had a huge open world with tons of things to do.
No, 40 and 50 look good enough though, idk why people like 30 as a standard
Hey, maybe this time the script kiddies won’t be able to sabotage people’s SINGLEPLAYER GAMES!
Only way I buy this:
- It is priced at 60 to 70 dollars (fuck that still hurts)
- It has a solid OFFLINE story mode.
If they try pull 100 dollar bullshit or fill it with micro transactions then I am out. Also I will not pre order this game (I didn’t with 5) I will wait until its out and I hear good things from the players.
Just like I did with 5. Had coworker who was bragging about the game every day. Finally and picked up a copy at Vintage Stock. This is the original PS3 version only one I have.
Point 2 is the biggest for me. I haven’t played more than 30 minutes of gta5 online. Single player story is where it’s at. Wish we got more DLC.
Same only tried it once was no fun. Yes they game was built to have multiple DLCs or hell lot more story could of been told.
I only recently started playing again specifically because I found out that all the missions in online mode that required you to be in a public lobby are now able to be ran in a private lobby. Playing in a solo lobby is basically like getting more SP story (there are story missions in GTAO; it’s not all races and DM). Don’t have to deal with cheaters or asshats.
I think it will be 80 dollars, with bigger editions available, eg. including online mode. For me, the 30fps is the most annoying, I was never a performance fanatic, but I’m used to 60 now.
Genuine question, why is $100 too much for a quality game? Completely agreed on the micro transactions though
Hm… how much is too much, then? If 70% higher than the industry standard isn’t too nuch
Wow people really didn’t like my question!
To respond to yours though, I’d say it depends on how much content there is! If a game can easily take 1000 hours with no degradation of enjoyment, I would pay $100 for it
Edit to add: I realize this didnt exactly address your question, but I’m not sure what percentage since it heavily depends on the quality and quantity of content
If the biggest game of the decade charges $100, every triple A game will charge the same, and other games will probably be more expensive as well, and in most cases it’ll be more money for the same steadily decreasing quality, at least in the triple A market.
What makes you think other games will be able to get away with $100 when plenty of them are having a tough time getting away with $70?
The only full price game I recall ever buying was Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3 (back when £35 was the standard “full price” price point). Now that one was worth it, but no other AAA game that I can think of has justified the cost to me. Once we’re talking about that amount of money there’s a lot of other things I would get more enjoyment from.
I think I paid about £10 for GTA V. I’d maybe go to £15 or £20 these days, but beyond that I simply have other things I could play.
Meh I’d drop 100 plus on standard night out. I dont buy many games but buying God of War Ragnarok for 30 and getting 100 hours of entertainment was well worth it, to the point I regret not buying it full price day one.
Good Lord, so much marketing about “next-gen” yet 60 still ain’t a guarantee 🤦♂️
30 fps wouldn’t be bad if its consistent and stable, have you ever played on a low end PC at 15-22 fps?
I grew up breaking games to make them run under minimum settings. Subnautica has (or at least had) a Dev menu or some shit that you could make the game look like utter arse.
Got me like 18fps at 480p, worth it #playable for younger me.
If I get under 100fps at 4k now I’m unhappy. How times change.
Lol, same, I’ve played some games at such abysmal resolution it became a testament of how good the art direction was, making it possible to recognize things amidst that jumble of pixels.
Funny how we grow accustomed with what we have. I was hyper-aware of my disk usage when I had a tiny HDD, nowadays I’m like “Why am I low on storage???”, then I go check and find 200GB of junk I no longer need on my downloads folder. Whoops.
Yeah I have, for a looong while. I understand a stable framerate is much better than a “high” one, but like, were not talking about a “Low-end” PC here, we’re talking about the current, still marketed generation here.
How come 30’s still the target when all the marketing is talking about how powerful it is and how amazing the upscaling is? And it’s a fixed target on top of all that, like common man
Remember, they released GTAV with 30FPS first to PS5 , then they sold an upgraded PS5 version @60FPS for an additional $10 (which is free on most games).
Like entirely new movement models, gun animations, car details, and texture fidelity for supporting a good feeling first person view.
This is false information. GTA V was backwards compatible from the ps4 version which ran at 30fps. Then they released an upgraded ps5 version that ran at 60fps. It wasnt a bad deal either.
Yeah but they still charged for the “upgrade”. A lot of gaming companies give you the PS5 version of a game for free if you already own the PS4 version.
