PS4/Xbox One owners - which is it, is 30fps "more cinematic" or is 60fps better all around?

Both.

Of course you want every game at 60fps if possible, but not every game needs to be 60fps for it to be great and still playable.

Here's the reality, not all games need 60 FPS.

Some genres do. Fighting games, action games (Ninja Gaiden), and twitch shooters should be 60 frames. Other than that, it's not a big deal if a game runs at 30 FPS.

Other than that, it's not a huge deal.

The world feels so small in this tiny little box I've been put in.

i want 144 fps.

Depends on the game and what the developer is trying to achieve.

I'll give a console examples of older games to keep it simple.

I've enjoyed PS2 old school games in 60fps (Champions of Norrath, Mark of the Kri, Devil May Cry, Devil May Cry 3, Star Ocean 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, Onimusha, Timesplitters, Various fighting games, Rygar, God of War, Zone of the Enders, Jak and Daxter, Tekken, R-Type Final, Castlevania Lament of Innocence, & Ratchet and Clank for example) and 30fps for legions of games. PS2 had butt-loads of 60 fps games including some Gran Turismo games. Tobal 1 on PS1 was 60fps I believe.

60fps Shout out to Dreamcast games like Project Justice, Ikaruga, Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi, Gamecube/PS2 Viewtiful Joe's 60fps, Metroid Prime series for GC, and Ninja Gaiden Black on Xbox. There's others at 60fps I did not list for PS2/GC/DC/Xbox like F-zero, but that list above is a good start.

60 fps is superior. Consoles are inferior.

You should really put a "dont give a shit" option as well. cause dats me.

The cinematic experience is better at 60fps

30 isn't a deal breaker but higher is always better.

If I was dropping $400 on a "next-gen" console I would expect all my games @ 60fps.

Cinematic is an excuse for "we're shit devs who can't do 60fps". In no world is 30 fps better than 60. Even in movies, The Hobbit was just so much more satisfying in 60.

Either one looks fine.

60 fps certainly has done any favors for PC in winning a goty exclusive for the past decade. Consoles superior.

lol

So more GOTYs = better system ? I need you to confirm that.

60 is better in every way. Lower than 60 only means the hardware can't handle the game and compromises have happened.

just having fun playing. been doing it over 30 years, and it isn't nitpicking details that does it for me.

"What's better, a McRib or a Filet Minion?"

I honestly don't care to much. As long as the game doesn't start to stutter... 30, 60, 120 fps, whatever.

But for the people that claim BS on the "cinematic" experience: watch The Hobbit in the high framerate version. It looks so damn cheap and it really does not feel like a cinema movie anymore, but a cheap TV production. I don't see why the same logic doesn't apply to games, especially if the dev's intention is to emulate the look and feel of a film.

Other than 60 FPS for racers, even for shooters it doesn't matter to me, I don't give a flying ****. :)

60fps is better, but 30fps is definitely playable. It's only when it dips below 30 things get annoying and even then it's really only if the dips are often.

24 fps and motion blur 2.0 with a film grain is so cinematic.

Console fans have to love it if they want current gen graphics.

@KungfuKitten: Don't forget the black bars!

:o Good catch! PC gamers are missing out!

I like both

I think it depends on the type of game - you wouldn't want Forza or GT running at 30fps, but other types of games may look better at 30fps.

60 fps is sometimes needed in certain genres but taking advantage of using more graphical upgrades at 30 fps makes sense in other genres, just sayin. :P

Anyone calling 30fps "more cinematic" should be banned for life.

Have any thoughts as to which games you think may look better at 30fps? I'm trying to think of some, and I just can't. Maybe South Park: The Stick of Truth, but they were specifically trying to match the look of the show and 60fps clearly would not have been appropriate in that case.

RPGs and Adventure games come to mind.

I dont care as long as I'm having fun.

I have always been told since the Ps2 Days that the human eye can't even process more than 30 frames per second and all the frame per second thing is a bunch of hooplah.

1080p60 should be standard on PS4 and X1, with very few exceptions.

since consoles have fixed hardware and you care about a cinematic experience then you drop frame-rate for better graphics and post-process effects. If you want a smooth experience you go with high frame-rate but lower graphics. The most important thing is to keep it consistent because with an unlocked frame-rate you still have lower latency but the image quality is slightly worse because of the judder effect.

It all depends on what the dev are able to achieve and what they want out of the game. The Order Dev clearly don't give fucks about making a shooter with tight gameplay as much as they care about a cinematic experience, so they rather push graphics instead of frame-rate. Meanwhile Naughty Dog always aim for the sky, which is why we got games like Uncharted and The Last of Us. To them high frame-rate is not even about the experience but about the challenge. They are aiming for 1080p/60fps with great graphics because that's what people want, the complete package.

Once you get used to 60fps it's hard to go back

There is always ultrawide monitors.

I remember when gamers scoffed at the idea of a low framerate.

Can't tell the difference so I don't care

I've never seen a subject evoke so much stupid from the "Master Race".

If you aren't smart enough to figure this out yourself by now, nothing anyone says here can help you.

Wait, you don't actually believe that, do you? The human eye doesn't see in "frames" at all, frame rate is a limitation of digital devices. The human brain processes light and colors and detects scene changes in what you're looking at, in effect the "framerate" that your eyes can see at is infinite. The entire "humans can't see more than 30 fps" argument is scientific nonsense started by console fanboys.

you get what you pay for $400 is too cheap for modern hardware tbh.

I'd take 60 fps any day.

More responsive and smoother framessss>>>>

Another reason why 30fps isn't an option.

Hit it right on the head. In fact I don't like the look of movies on the new LED's with the super high refresh rate. It makes everything look cheap like it was shot on video (video is 60 FPS and Film is 24). As mentioned, the only time I truly prefer 60fps is for fighters like Street fighter or perhaps CoD. Everything else, who gives a shit?

So to answer your question TC for a single player experience I would prefer 1080/30fps but for something competitive like a fighter or twitch shooter I could deal with a rez drop for higher fps.

We all know what this thread is really about though. It's about the fact that TLoU remastered is about to shit on Crysis3 and Hermits are going to have a meltdown when they realize their coveted 360 port is not only not graphics king, it's not even the best looking game from last gen.

Vs

Windows fanboys are about to get pounded out ;)