@Rushaoz While a PC with dual Titans will smoke a PS4, a PS4/Xbox One will smoke a 1000$ PC, if optimized well, because the O/S doesn't have to spend time scheduling and allocating resources to thousands of other threads from everything ranging from AV to little Nividia service/tool to ASUS utilities to Office helper to Ipod helper and so on and so forth. A game console has a set amount of resources to work with, but when you know EXACTLY what you're working with, you can aim for 100% utilization instead of spikey and erratic utilization as you get in a PC. That said, I love my PC for simulators and MMOs, but sports, action adventure, racing, etc. all do better on console.
@wiimanclassic @Flubbbs Banner Saga and ShadowRun both had well known veterans working on them. FTL was already playable when the KS started. If you're going to donate, treat it as a high risk, low reward expense. Do your diligence on the team and make sure that if they have never shipped a game, they have a realistic scope and plan to get to launch.
@fearthedaemon @istuffedsunny just no. Every person is unique, but at minumum, the lowest ever recorded in a study was ~ 44. The highest; 90. The vast bell curve of people fall in the mid 70's A good test was the old CRT monitors. If you could run it at full resolution and deal with the 60 hz, you have slower image processing. If you had to run the resolution down a notch to get it at 85 hz so you didn't see grotesque flicker, you're closer to average.
Of course this guy is gonna say 30 fps sucks when his product becomes dogcrap at lower framerates. What this new money has to understand is that, not all of us buy into his dorkass vision of the future with rooms full of people wearing black boxes on their head. I like console game. I like console games that use as many shader effects and particles, shadows, etc. A high quality 720p image will LOOK tenfold better than a cardboard box 1080p one. more detail != more quality. As for framerate, I don't know why the industry has this 30/60 obsession. The optimal is actually ~48 (except sports, racing and fast paced fps which beg for 60fps), especially if you're using any motion blur or post process effects. If devs targetted 720/30/48, Games would look amazeballs. They could be antialiased well, have twice the shader passes, do all kinds of lighting.
But most importantly, if this d1ckhead thinks 30 fps is "failure", he's obviously never made a game in his life... especially a console game. Maybe he'd be happy running around a game world that looks like SNES Starfox at 2000fps. Most gamers love high quality graphics.
@Aaronp2k For sh1tty looking Valve games, Open GL is nice and efficient. Try using *ANY* high end effects and the gains are sacrificed and it starts performing much worse. DX is best of breed.
Also, because they are using heavy AA on the game, NOBODY can tell a difference when used with the X1 Upscaler. But it's OK, ponies, enjoy your MASSIVE supply of exclusives this year. What do you got? Maybe Drive Club (which is turning out to be such a steaming piece of crap, they didn't even include it in their 3 hour TV, MOVIES, COMICS! presentation).
Chippiez's comments