30 Frames Per Second Is Lame 

Like Devil May Cry, and Armored Core.

@@hayaokakizaki4463 no, metal gear solid and Spyro 😎

@@kennypowers1945 terrible taste, MGS rocks but Spyro is a mid collectathon made for extended game rentals

and footage of F Zero GX to back it, what a game.

Jak and Daxter trillogy were 60fps on PS2...and 2 and 3 took place in an open world.

And I'm not joking

Garten of ban ban:

Valid take

​@@LakeGameCreepr you consider that a game?

Play Spark The Electric Jester 2 and 3 if you want Sonic Adventure but only Sonic levels and less glitchy.

real

I spent $2000 on a PC and $500 on a monitor to stare at death screens in 1440p 170fps :D

@@ericw.1620 Yep. Well actually I'm pretty good in most games, except the ones my friends play. I join them on Warzone and constantly just get crapped on but I load up Splitgate (RIP) and I'm consistently top of the team.

@@Gatorade69 why rip split gate? It’s still a thing no?

@@kennypowers1945 I'm not ripping it. The devs have abandoned it. I loved it, I mean It's still good but It's definitely dying/on the way out.

Console gens last 10 years or so, covid was only 2. Think before you start typing.

@@riddell26 bro what console has ever lasted a decade

@@riddell26 console generations should never naturally last 10 entire damn years, its usually closer to half that. generations lasting an entire decade is a recent development, probably due to how stagnant everything has become

​@meee_51 I mean I guess the ps4 is still going and that's already 10 years old

​@@meee_5155 don't know if we're talking about the ps4 as a whole or a specific one that someone got in 2013 but if we're talking about it as a whole, then I guess he's right

There's also the fact they manually alter the clock speeds of certain parts to time well with the console's physical limitations. Ex. Mario kart 64 moo moo meadows ran normal speed on a standard n64. But the wii and subsequent ports ran the track at double the speed because those newer consoles didn't have the slow processing times that they accounted for in the n64.

To be fair Mario 64 runs pretty poorly on an actual n64, frequently reducing frame rate

Many first party N64 games also registered inputs 60 times a second so that they didn't actually feel as laggy.

@@rainydaygirlz Ooh that... makes a lot of sense, actually, there isn't crazy input lag because inputs just weren't tied to the framerate.

@@latticepoint5245 mario 64 was infamously compiled in debug mode, cutting its performance by a third. its also optimized pretty poorly, but you can't really blame them because 3d graphics were brand spanking new and they did pretty well given they had to make most things from scratch under a deadline. luigi co-op was cut because it would run at lime 10fps, but if the game had more time in the oven for optimization they could have got it working at a nice 20-30fps and have the base game near 60. kaze emanuar has a great series of videos about optimizing and fixing mario 64, its really satisfying to see him chip away at it and get it running and looking well on real hardware.

legend!

Bless

doing the lord's work this man

I wasn't asking this because I mainly listen to videos, but I saw it just as I saw this comment, and now I'm interested.

Or battlepasses within battlepasses !

This is only like triple A FPS games. 95% of modern games being released right now aren't like this lol. Well maybe the less content part is accurate. And even then people complain about that sort of stuff vehemently until they forget about it after four days.

@Devil And worse yet, the vast majority of gamers put up with this crap from developers, too. I will NEVER in my life pay seventy f*cking dollars to download some code, that probably doesn't even work on day one, only to be told you need to also download a 20 GB day-one patch to said code. The gaming industry is such a sh*tshow right now and most gamers just take the abuse with a smile. Steam sales all the way for me. If it's over $35, I ain't payin' for it!

Publishers, not developers

To be fair games haven't increased that much in price over the course of 30 years, and you're certainly getting a lot more value (content/playtime) with most modern games compared to older games.

They are lies to win over the PC gaming crowd

Probably the harddrive

Cause developers suck. Theres no reason a new game should be running at 30 fps on PS5 or Series X. Both consoles are powerful & we dont even have a true next gen game yet

Especially not this game there Looks like there's absolutely nothing graphically demanding enough to demand that low of a frame rate

I think / hope that at some point they realised that whoever pulled the trigger on modular upgradeable parts - essentially removing one of the major selling points of a console vs a pc - would alienate a huge chunk of their audience.

how tf did you play hollow knight at 12 frames per second. I can't beat it at two hundred fps....

Huh, I mean, 12-20 fps is kinda unplayable

​@@phoenixjones7191bro is clearly a god amongst men

​@@David-ki2xt tell that too my kid self who mastered these frame rates

Nah bro even 30 to 60 is massiv. once you get up to ~100-144 you hit a plateau.

Cuphead fans: *creepypasta-photo-of-mr-incredible.jpg*

sonic unleashed is the worst game ever, because it has the game that literally everybody loved back then alongside sonic,4/10

that’s the thing, the console is capable of so, so much more. but whether it be bad management of the project, bad timing, or just bad decision making at the developer or publisher (i’m saying this for both third-party and first-party games), many games nowadays just don’t take advantage of the console like they could. even in further updates, very little is truly fixed or added on in that regard to improve the experience. it is pretty disappointing, and i know that PlayStation fanboys will use this as an argument as to why “playstation exclusives are just better and it is the better console!” but honestly, the issue isn’t with the console, or potentially even the developers, it’s probably decisions made by people way up above them who are either being pushed or genuinely have no clue.

Different kinds of game need different frame-rates. The more action-oriented games need higher frame rates because reaction time matters. Strategy games on the other hand could be slideshows.

@@PlatinumAltaria I'm aware of that fact and I completely understand his point. I'm not arguing that. I was just correcting the blanketed statement that was given to old games (of all genres) and their FPS.

A lot of games back then had worse performance than we remember. Games today generally run better than they ever have. Thanks to places like Mad Tech, Digital Foundry, and NX Gamer I’ve seen that performance in most games is generally better than it was in any other generation with 3D games. 5th generation was the worst for performance while the 9th generation is stacking up to be one of the best if performance trends keep going. 8th generation is about equal with the 6th generation but the 6th generation does have a higher percentage of 60fps games, although performance was less stable

@@FoxerTails he didn't say that all games used to be 60 FPS did he?

Nes games were able to run at 60 FPS.

Yeah, this just seems like a silly video. Microsoft mandates features, not graphics.

@@raelimperialaerosolkid true Callisto protocol have only 30 fps mode on series s to this day. I think the part that they want the game to look good is true, and the fears he have for the next 5 years are legit. I am disappointed for the lack of 60 fps mode day 1 for unreal engine 4 game when Fortnite wz2 and atomic can do 120 on series s. I will play redfall on m pc day 1 but I feel bad that I can’t play it on m tv with the play anywhere feature. Series s is underrated for the price.

Smart comment detected, a miracle has been achieved

very funny

oof ;m;

If I was a video game, I would require micro-transaction to even start in the morning.

If u were a game no one would play you 😭

@@MathewLewit you MONSTER

@@00McMuffin00 you are welcome, that will be 0.99, thanks.

Digital Foundry also suggests that Hogwarts legacy is bad because J.K. and females shouldn't look feminine. They are shills also.

​@@cloudycolacorp They are not even trying to optimize games anymore, that's a fact.

Thats not how the visual scripting code works though, people have ran test making the same game with both. It didn’t effect runtime performance. Digital Foundry fell off like 5 years ago though so im not surprised they are just saying stuff again.

​@@cloudycolacorp uuh, of all games why use todd's non working ai as an example, and not games with better ai

​@@RusticRonnie🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢🧢

I agree 100 percent with you

Halo 3 was the last game released on the 360 that ran under full [720p?] Or [1080p] can't remember, but it does take time to optimize consoles performance. Look at Ghost Reckon Advanced Warfighter from 2006 on the 360 and compare it to The Last of Us on the PS3 from 2013. The difference is STAGGERING. Even me, playing Fable 2 from 2008 and comparing it to Kingdoms of Amalur; Reckoning from 2012, they're night and day. Optimization takes time, it *Literally* does not happen over night.

I think it was confirmed the Series X version has 60fps ready to go. But they won't flip the switch because the Series S 60fps isn't ready and they don't want to make it look bad. Terrible choice.

@@sawdust8691 I think most people wouldn't care that the Series S looks worse than the Series X.

That's mainly to do with how garbage the CPU's of the ps4 and xbox one (and their pro varients) were. Most AAA games (especially open world ones) just wouldn't be able to run at 60fps regardless of resolution (resolution being GPU-related)

I dunno, about that, 480p 120hz seems really low. Isn’t it more likely to be a max of 900p and minimum of 720p with dynamic resolution scaling?

Better resolution, rt , stable fps, double storage , disk, more options for graphics in game. When the series s is on discount if u count the controller with it have the same price with the Apple TV. So far Xbox sell well and the series s helped a lot for that

The series s is fully capable of playing Redfall on 1080p60 with FSR and other sampling shit.

​@@collisions4615 just fucking get a good pc then, more features

@@thatitalianlameguy2235 “just get a good pc” yeah alright, lemme spend $800 - $1100 for a good pc that can get relative performance to this $300 console! what a deal! lot of people don’t care about “more features”. lot of people have a basic work laptop or desktop for doing homework or actual work, then they hop on a console for some gaming and that’s it. no need to spend the extra hundreds of bucks on something you really don’t need for what you’re wanting to do.

@@completelyaverageviewer steam deck is a $400 pc and can run most games atleast fairly well.

That's not how things work. Dropping resolutions won't always guarantee a higher frame cap.

plus most people still only have 1080p TVs in their living rooms anyway, especially those getting the S

It's almost like most of the time they prioritize glitz and glamour over good design.

Probably. Lots of game engines can’t handle higher fps as well as lower fps so it can cause some issues

Its the same logic behind having a cum-quality cpu in smart TVs so they can hit that funni 4 kays and still be cheap

@@OtakuUnitedStudio NO! that can't be true!

Which is so strange because graphically this game feels like it's from 10 years ago. There seems to be no logical reason as to why it's locked to such a low frame rate other than technical issues

I didn't know that the PS2 had 60fps games. During the PS2 years, I had given-up on gaming.

Imo the only industry where 60fps should be standard is gaming, it’s simply not necessary and a waste of resources for most film/animation projects, though I don’t yet work in the industry (I’m still getting my degree lol)

Animation is not a field where framerate is a functional concern, it's an artistic one. How the framerate changes in an animated film can have dramatic effect on the stories tone and feel. However in videogames it makes a night and day difference in terms of how responsive a game feels, but it's not usually meaningful on an artistic level.

The newest Avatar movie ran at 48fps and was one of the many reasons why it looked so good.

@@corruptedpoison1 Avatar way of water ran at a standard 24fps but there are parts of the movie that were rendered at 48fps in theatres that support HFR. The parts that ran at 48 frames were, again, part of the artistic decision making process. But running a movie at a flat 48 frames doesn't make it inherently better looking (example: The Hobbit).

@@deathtenk leave it to an Avatar fan to not understand that though

My thought is, an xbox is just a worse, budget pc. I see no reason to buy an xbox since I already have a good pc. I see a lot of reasons to own a playstation on top of a pc: good exclusives, controller innovations, boundary pushing power for a console

@@milky_toast_ well, the way I see it as someone who has grown up with the Xbox and uses it as my main gaming device, though I also own both the Series X and PS5, it really just depends overall on a number of factors. Gamepass is a very good deal for what it is, and it does have some gems that PS+ doesn’t have, though PS+ has the same thing as well as having a number of its own exclusives available via the Premium, but even on the Extra. Xbox has an advantage as they offer first-party games day one on gamepass, which is something I wish PlayStation would do personally. in terms of their power, both consoles have power to them, almost in equal amounts. however unlike the PS5, the Xbox hasn’t really had any games that have pushed it to show it’s power, like how Rift Apart or Miles Morales did for the PS5. I also do appreciate the complete overhaul of the controller as well as the UI for the PS5, and even after having not used a PlayStation controller for easily over 9 years, I was able to start using the DualSense very quickly. but I will say, I completely understand just upgrading what players are already familiar with, and the current Xbox controller is definitely superior, however I do wish it truly did implement next-gen features like the haptic triggers, or just better haptic feedback overall. I’d say, as of right now, it really just depends on what you’ve been with and what you currently have. if you have a powerful PC, you really don’t have any particular reason to get an Xbox due to gamepass being available on PC and cross platform play being an option most of the time. PS5 has made itself a necessity if you want that environment and access to those games, though it does make me commend Xbox and Microsoft for not requiring people to buy their console just to play exclusives. I enjoy both consoles, and while I still find myself playing Xbox 90% of the time, the PS5 is honestly what I’d call a truly next-gen console, it checks off many more boxes than the Series X does in terms of upgrades. side note: Series X feels like it’s being treated much like how the 360 was treated. though, even the 360 got a new updated UI and completely new controller and whatnot, but the game support and first-party development just slowed down so much and was treated almost like an afterthought. that’s how I feel like a lot of stuff on the Xbox is, just an afterthought. we didn’t get a 4K home menu for months after launch, and even now, some menus are still just being rendered in 1080p. we haven’t gotten a proper next-gen first-party game, and I won’t be considering Redfall that until it introduces its 60FPS mode, which was sort of the big deal about this generation next to 120FPS support.

I agree but msft could want the SS to also achieve 60 which could cause an extra burden(extended timeframe) on the devs to patch in 60 on sx

Are any of those games first party?

If you got the money to blow on a high end monitor you can get a 70in 8k TV with 240hz refresh rate. You're a fool to still choose the monitor.

​@@riddell26well a tv that size wouldn't fit on my desk and I had to go with a high end QHD monitor so....

@@riddell26 Not really, given the monitor will almost always have a significantly better response time, which matters with games. Especially more competitive games. There is a good reason smaller monitors are more expensive, and that's largely because they genuinely perform better and have a clearer image. Your comment reeks of ignorance, dude.

@@Edward-1945-colorized Then don't use it on a monitor desk.

@@riddell26 What kinda "high end monitor" are we talking here?? A fucking reference monitor?? And what TV's are you looking at? Samsung's 8k Neo QLED at 75 inches is £6,800. Sony's 8k Mini-LED is £7,500. LG's 8k OLED was over £10,000. Samsung's most expensive gaming monitor I can find is the Odyssey Arc at £2,600. You can get a 27inch 1440P or 4K 144Hz monitor for around £350, depending on whether or not you wanna buy new from their website (1440p for £350) or a discontinued model (4K for £350). Saving up enough to get a monitor that can do 144hz at 1440p or 4K from a name brand like LG is hardly having enough to get one of these TV's.

Npc brain

Probably not dead since it’s on gamepass and normies will eat it up

Yup

Whenever my nerd friend in highschool bragged about his pc running minecraft at 400 fps, I legit chuckled and said cool?... 😅 That's like gloating about how you trimmed your lawn to an equal height with a pair of scissors lmao.

Our eyes do not see in frames. Saying any certain frame rate is the limit is a complete lie. There are diminishing returns but you are completely wrong. What is far more important is response times. I bet you can see the difference between a crappy low response time LCD and a CRT even if both games were running at a stable 60fps

Based take and fuck Google+

Dude go outside and touch grass

Unless your playing games online competitively, fps doesn't matter. It does not feel sluggish at all, you just keep telling yourself that.

@@ehsanghazavi470 lmao, as if FPS is the only competitive multiplayer genre. And this absolutely applies to single player games... play Mario Sunshine and Galaxy back-to-back and tell me the platforming doesn't feel better 🤔

@@SF.-_ if you play video games for more than an hour, you need to go outside.

I did not think about 24 FPS on a "Choose Your Own Adventure Narrative Game" (most shorten it to simply "Adventure" or "Point-and-click"), but that's actually kind of genius. If it was animated in just about any style (not just photorealistic), then it SHOULD play at 24 because that's the safest number for animation.

ayyyyyyy

Games ran slower back then, though. Once we got to the 360/PS3 era, games either ran at the same speed with a lower frame rate or forced PAL60.

Pal60 was a thing during the late 5th gen and many 6th gen games had it from what I’ve seen online. Although I’m not from those regions

Well many ps3 and 360 games actually changed resolution based on what what output resolution you chose. Some games were just played better if you set your console to output 480i/p

You need to get your eyes checked the...the difference is massive. I simply can't play 30

@@Rushman666 for us it’s massive but for normies they can’t tell a difference for some reason. I’ve explained to my wife and friends a million times but they are like “what”

@@Rushman666 don't know what to tell ya, I've played games my entire life but unless there's a fps counter at the bottom I would never be able to tell what frame rate it is. I can sort of tell when going from 30 to 120 but even then I wouldn't be confident enough to make a guess.

Sound like you've got eye problems, mate.

I can't notice it either

as someone without a Play Station... still waiting on that PC port (with the framerate unlocked)

It's honestly comical that my rx570 has as much or more vram, that I bought for 60 bucks brand new 5 years ago, than gpus sold for thousands of dollars today

Doubt it. The series S and X do not have dedicated vram and just use the system ram that they have on board. The Series S has 10gb of ram while the Series X has 16gb of ram. This has nothing to do with vram as that’s solely an nvidia problem

@@suspecm6316 no your rx570 does not have more vram. 4gb of vram is low and the only card to have that recently is the RTX 3050 laptop version. Every other GPU is 6gb and up

@@crestofhonor2349 the rx570 is a strange case I know because it alone has like 4 different versions. The most widespread is the 4 gig one but there is 6 gig and 8 gig versions of it, which I was lucky enough to snag before the whole GPU price hike.

True next gen games sure.

Bigger number = THE FUTURE! It's the same reason they can sell people an underpowered PC every 5 years and call it a "console generation".

Except without the extra steps

@thecianinator tell that to the bureaucrats in the house of reps and supreme court

We don’t really have anything close to a monopoly yet in gaming

Not really. The vast majority of games still have a 60fps mode