Poll: How Important is 1080p/60fps To You?

Naughty Dog announced that Uncharted 4: A Thief's End's single-player mode will not run at 60fps.

According to their co-lead designer, "If we wanted to hit a locked 60fps, there's a lot of optimizations in the environments that would have to happen," said Newman. "This would make each level take longer to make. The same amount of geometry would take longer to make because it would have to be so heavily optimized. And so that could end up having story repercussions. 'We want to have this scene, but we don't have the time to make the environment.' It's a feature, like any other, and you have to consider it against everything else."

How important is 1080p/60fps to you?

It depends on what kind of game you're playing. Sometimes 30fps is just fine, but still, you can't deny that a solid 60fps is more playable, no matter what. I prefer a better framerates to better graphics, myself. When at first, I was at 30fps I thought it looked okay. Then I switched to 60fps and I was surprised by how much... better it was. Then I switched back to 30fps and saw how choppy it was. I wouldn't have noticed if I hadn't seen the 60fps. Now then, I voted: Very. Graphics play a huge part in how great a game is. Now just because I said that, doesn't mean I'm a graphic whore. I enjoy a good story and as long as the game is fun, it's all good at the end.

For me, it all depends on the type of game. 1080p at 60fps is ideal but if both are not an option and one must be sacrificed for the other, 60fps is more important in a multiplayer game so I'm fine with 720p at 60fps. But if it's a single player/story driven game 1080p is more important so 1080p at 30fps works.

@GameSpot: unless it's a competitive game like say a sports game which i play a lot, then i don't really care if it's 30 fps 900p. I care about good games

im happy to play at 30FPS for most games (racing games...60FPS is certainly a bigger bonus).

i do like to play at my TV or monitors native resolution though..thats the most important thing. i dont want it getting stretched out.

It's not really all that important to me. I'll take 60fps at the cost of a lower resolution.

I don't really care about FPS/Graphical effects all that much as long as the game's good and playable tbh. Even if it means it has to run at 25fps, let alone 30.

It's important, but 1440p/144fps is more important. :)

The resolution isn't that big of a deal personally, but I'd prefer 60fps always. That doesn't mean I won't play anything that's 30fps, but if that game were 60fps it'd be much better. Destiny, for example, runs fine at 30fps, but it would be better at 60fps.

2015 and still not able to play games in 1080p/60fps?
maybe in 2020 this hardware limitations caused by consoles will be all gone...

60 FPS is about gameplay and not graphics and gameplay is the most major thing since if the gameplay isnt good no matter how the game looks or how wonderful the story is itll take away from it

50% people don't have enough money to buy new rigs too often due to graphical improvements so they learned the value of story ind its impact. 50% of people have enough money and demand improvements on gaming field that will eventually lead to story improvements in future but not now. Thats why most triple A games suck and GOG revolution is spreading. Action and reaction. Thats why we need genre diversity. Turn based RPGs and RPGs alike don't need to be graphical improved too much. Lets say StarCraft 2 like engine is enough. Divinity Original Sin engine is enough. Infinity engine is enough. On the other heads Action oriented and fast paced games need graphics more. Why would a chess game need 1080p/60fps...

Human eyes only comprehend 30fps.

This guy explained it prty good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHrxl10buIs

1080p is not impressive to me but 60 FPS IS A MUST FOR EVERY GAME THIS IS 2015 GODDAMMIT! no one wants a choppy framerate! i don't want my game to have the frame rate of a game&watch.

"If we wanted to hit a locked 60fps, there's a lot of optimizations in the environments that would have to happen"
THEN DO IT YOU LITTLE BONERS! make the game run at 60 FPS! you should be able plan both story&gameplay!

Low jittery framerates use to give me headaches. Going back to when I played Unreal! Since then I've always made sure I'd rather turn gfx on low to get a nice solid 60+ then have it look pretty and run at 17-30.

I believe that a balance is key to making a great game. As for visuals, If the game is suited for 60 fps, that is fine. If the game is suited to look really pretty and have more of a cinematic experience at 30 fps, that's fine as well.

30 is not great, but it hasent prevent me from enjoying a game.

Offcourse if i ever get a say in it im gona choose 60FPS.

I prefer a good story over frame rate/ multiplayer

I want good games !!! I don't know why this gen is so focused on 1080/60fps. I prefer to have lower fps but solid then very smooth then all-of-a-sudden super slow ( looking at you Bethesda )

As long as I get a stable 720p and 30 fps I'm good. That isn't ideal, obviously, but it is the minimum acceptable range. Anything higher than that is a welcomed bonus, but not strictly necessary. Still, don't waste my time with lower.

To me it's about expectations. If a game releases on consoles then I always tell myself to be prepared for the compromise in visual fidelity. If it's on PC then there is no excuse to cap anything. (Looking at you Arkham Knight.)

1080p@60fps should be the min standard of game nowadays.. we don't care if dev took a very long time to optimize the game to achieve that feature.

Because it will make dev reputation soar sky high with satisfied consumer.. win win situation

@GameSpot: I want the graphics to be the best under what the performance of the game allows.

These answers are really poorly worded. So if I prefer story, I don't like graphics? And also, if it's not 60fps then the "graphics" are bad? You can't have good graphics at 30fps? This is stupid, click-baity nonsense... and I fell for it.

I honestly don't know what most of the games I play are running in. Sure, 60fps is noticeably more fluid than 30fps or lower, but 30fps is fine with me so long as it's consistent. And of course there's a limit to how much I can look past how a game looks, but very rarely do I actually have enough issues with a game's graphics for it to impact my enjoyment on it. FPS drops are more worrisome when I notice them. But in short, I look at many other factors of a game than what it's framerate and resolution are.

60FPS is pretty fantastic, and I definitely miss it when it's absent.

1080p isn't as important unless I'm playing on a monitor.

The poll is kind of weird. It's like I have to pick story or graphics. Why not both?

People who demand 60fps are full of it. Is there a difference between 30 and 60? Of course, but run both rates side by side, and you'll see that the difference is hardly noticeable unless you are specifically looking for it, and let's be honest, if you're LOOKING for problems in your visuals, you need to take a chill pill.

@Daveof89: For gamers like myself, the framerate is not a visual thing, it mostly determines how the game feels. I would rather play a game at 720p@60fps than 1080p@30fps. Of course, when possible I try to play at the highest resolution and framerate. For PC games where you can choose these settings I will sometimes find a "happy medium" like 900p@50fps for example.

I am not that much into the technology but is there a reason why they can not do something like 45FPS at 900p?

It totally depends on which platform, console can do upscale low resolution to 1080p and still looks great. 30/60 fps both are acceptable IF the frame rate is stable with no dip. No point playing a 30fps game and dips to 1X fps at every stage. Regardles if it is 1080p/4k, if the frame rate dips, experience is ruined.

On PC, let's be honest here, non native resolution is crap since PC does not upscale well at all. Running games on 720p and 900p is blurry as hell on a 1080p screen to the point that you can't even read and see the details on screen. PC have the tendency to have better hardware compare to consoles so it should be able to perform better than the console. For a person that is commonly using PC all the time, it is rather hard to play games below the frame of the monitor's refresh rate which majority of the monitors in the market have 60hz aka 60fps.

There is no clear line in deciding. Definitely not non native resolution on PC. Looks so horrible.

It's not really all that important to me. A lot of the times, I don't really like how 60fps looks even. It just feels weird and it's hard for me to get used to.

Doesn't really matter to me a great deal... if it's a great game and I'm totally immersed, I won't notice if it's 1080p or 900p, or 60FPS or 30.

Having said that of course I'd rather it be as high as possible, but like I said, it's not a deal breaker.

60FPS is more important, I'll take lower resolution and worse graphics for a solid 60 any day of the week.

my 39.5" 4k monitor and 60 fps sounds about right.

The poll doesn't make sense. People play in high frame rate not because it looks good, but higher fps allows faster display response and hence lesser input lag (display updates more quickly with each input). Thus it is not graphics, but gameplay which higher frame rate enhances.

Anyways I'll chose 60 anytime, even when navigating game menus.

@GameSpot: Let's say, for a game like Uncharted or Batman or Assassins Creed, 60fps is not so important. The goal of adventure games is to immerse people in its environment and if improving graphics and sacrificing framerate means I'll get a more consistent and immersive environment, then go ahead (for PC its my decision to make =P). If, for example, its a racing game, especially if its a Rally game, then 60fps is damn important and I have to be able to see clearly what is coming.

Gameplay always comes first to me. Would it be nice if every game came perfectly optimized?...yes it would! But I wouldn't hate it any less if it wasn't...unless it was painfully noticeable. Higher resolution and fps is a really nice bonus, especially for consoles.

This is exactly what is wrong with the industry.

It's a game by game matter, I could live with some at 30FPS, others I wouldn't get near them at that. I've played several games around that that I've truly enjoyed because other aspects of it were worth it.

Now if you put something like a Hokey game in front of me with at 200 FPS or Half-Life 3 at 25 FPS guess which one I'll be playing?

We are talking about gamers here right?

We are never satisfied!!

I've never cared about framerate.

Yeah, it would be nice to play any game on the PC at max settings and resolution. But as someone who still enjoys plenty of old-school, 30fps on an average resolution (like 1360 x 768 or so) is often plenty enough for me.

A game is perfectly playable for me at 30-40 fps. But, more is welcome anytime.

i dont see why we should be dropping content for the sake of quality or vice versa

i would happily play a game on any fps scale providing the content is there but were also in an age where the quality should be right up there

60 FPS is obviously better and makes the game feel better to play. But 30 FPS is playable and works just fine.

I just dont like how console games want to lock themselves in a framerate and resolution. The Last of Us Remaster feature was awesome. I'd gladly trade 30FPS/1080p for 60FPS/720p. Pretty sure there are some who would do vice versa if there was a choice in the matter.

It's so very, VERY, important that games not be as low as 1080p/60fps. No 1440+/120hz+? Then it's shameful!

Shame on you consoles. You ought to be embarrassed by your low, low specs.

+1

After seeing 60 fps and 30 fps I think it more of a placebo than anything meaningful and not that huge for the game.