60 frames per second (FPS) is something that every console gamer have been asking for since the release of the PS3 and Xbox 360, and very few games have delivered. Many gamers have made up excuses as to why we still haven’t made 60 FPS the standard, the most common one being that current generation hardware simply isn’t capable of a solid 60 FPS. This is far from the truth. Making 60 FPS a standard isn’t a hardware limitation; rather it’s a developer limitation.
Electronic Arts CEO Andrew Wilson stated in a recent EA Earnings Call, that the next Battlefield "it is going to be another tremendous live service.”
Another? ANOTHER?
Is he honestly trying to make out like the last Battlefield was a huge success, not just as a game but as a live service game? I'm sure these guys live in their own echo chambers, they are so far removed from reality or they just like talking out of their arse trying to rewrite history.
Also why say such a tone deaf statement when you know the state of live service games at the minute and how many gamers feel about them. Bigging up the next BF game as live service does not give me any excitement or hype.
Already on Steam with some of the finest review shouts you'll ever likely see, Amanda the Adventurer is soon coming to all major consoles
UK indie outfit Roll7 is reportedly facing closure, along with Bethesda’s Tango Gameworks and Arkane Austin – but if making award-running, profitable games doesn’t guarantee safety, what will?
Idk. Great games have still been releasing. Mcsft is still no different than after the 360 era. PS, you just have to wait many years for. Nintendo is readying next gen and will definitely have many games. 3rd party and indies have been the highlight so far this year.
Not really, what's happening is the sh!tty AAA industry is finally collapsing and things will revert back to mid-tier being the dominant tier like back in the day.
why not make 45 fps a standard? I don't understand the need to double the frames from 30. 45 will seem smoother and when a game dips in frames during intensive graphical moments we won't see the choppy 20-25 fps as seen in some games.
As well there won't be as large of a requirement for hardware to be dedicated to rendering those extra frames as 60fps would need.
Devs will always struggle to optimize their games at the highest possible settings at which point the console will struggle to run said games smoothly. Unlike PC tech which can be upgraded, dedicated consoles have their limits and don't usually offer ways around them (RAM upgrade for the N64 and storage upgrades for HD consoles are exceptions to that).
If you have a graphically intensive game that's pushing the console to its limits then it is more difficult to run the game at a higher framerate. It also depends on how sufficient the developer is; Gears of War 3's framerate was fairly solid from what I remember. Sonic Generations' framerate is pretty low and dips when there is a lot of action on the screen. Same with Sonic All-Stars Racing Transformed.
There is a ton of different factors as to why a game may run the way it does. It really just depends on how a game is made and how capable its creators are.
Has to be, or we be using PS2 and Xbox tech.
60fps NEEDS to be the standard. I can't stand these sluggish games.
All games should be 60fps