Why Do Gamers Care about 1080p and 60 FPS So Much?

Developers are having issues hitting 1080p and 60 fps. Why do gamers care so much?

At the beginning of the current console generation, hardcore gamers and game marketers decided on a benchmark for consoles: 1080p/60fps. That’s shorthand for a resolution of 1920x1080 in progressive scan, running at a frame rate of 60 frames per second. The latter benchmark, frame rate, can also be locked or unlocked; locked means it says at a specific number, while unlocked means the rate can fluctuate.

Last generation’s consoles, the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, observed a general benchmark of 720p (1280x720 progressive) at 30 fps towards the end of their lifespan. Yet developers have had a hard time hitting the new 1080p/60 fps benchmarks with those system’s successors, especially in the frame rate department.

Will the next generation of consoles fare any better in consistently hitting the mark?

[crazychris4124]

60 fps is a luxury, 30 fps is the standard

[OldDude]

Where did you get that from, consoles? I don't consider 30fps the standard, especially on racing and fighting games. Game developers have done a nice job brainwashing you if you believe 30fps is acceptable.

[crazychris4124]

30 is acceptable. I want 60 fps. Im always turning down settings to achieve 60 fps. All im saying is if the game is great then ill be ok with 30 fps.

[Vegamyster]

Whats funny about the start of last gen is you had companies & devs making a big deal about consoles being HD for the first time but now it doesn't matter apparently. Most games were 720p or lower/30 fps with drops so you would expect that new hardware put out 8 years later could at least do 1080p 60 fps considering 4k isn't too far from being affordable, all 3 companies went with cheaper hardware this gen and instead of devs/people just saying that they give excuses.

[christian hour]

Exactly, people need to understand cheaper more affordable consoles made sense for the climate this time around, last gen started at the height of the boom, to deliver a cutting edge console at 600+ dollars when most people are still struggling over the most recent great depression would just be an insult to consumers and invite backlash.

Honestly I'm fine with 30fps, i've never had the luxury of a super gaming pc, so I'm used to playing 5-10 year old games on the lowest of settings, if a game can pull off 60fps at 1080p, thats a bonus, but if it doesnt, as long as the game is good and aesthetically pleasing I can live with myself. I've seen some 60fps/1080p games that are aesthetically VOMIT and horrible to look at, its not the end all and be all of gaming visuals and performance. Anyone who thinks it is is missing the point, but to also dismiss it is silly too. I'ts nice to have when we have it, it's no biggy if we don't. Grow up, move on, enjoy your games.

Also I don't expect this generation to last as long as the last (again part of this was due to the global economic climate that hit midway through the gen). This gen should only last as long as the dreamcast/n64/ps1 or xbox/ps2/GCN era before we see the xboxTHREE60 or a ps5 at e3. If not then hopefully some wizards come along and find some magic under the hood or theres another breakthrough in how we render graphics and use up less processing power.

Either way this console gen is gonna be a good one :)

[Christopher]

Generally, I don't care. But, when we're talking about the comparisons of hardware capabilities, it is relevant and one way to measure said capabilities.

[NuggetsOfGod]

spoken like a true console gamer lol.

1440p 60fps will be standard on pc by 2016 with 4-5k on the rise.
Ddr 4 should be cheaper by then.

For buddah sake it's 2015 & 60fps is a luxury?

120fps is a luxury my friend.

From ps3 to ps4 no 60fps standard.
Good luck with ps5 hopefully.
I think we may see 4k 30fps do to #ResolutionGate2

http://www.guru3d.com/artic...

Gtx970 is not the most high end card and gets 66 fps at 2.5k res or 32fps at 4k.
I don't mind paying more to get more. Can't wait for buttery smooth VR with killing floor 2!

[christian hour]

Spoken like someone who can afford to keep up with technology. If we're talking standards, meaning, the standard capability of the average PC in everyones homes, then the standard is actually WAY below 30fps and 1080p. PC gamers with nice rigs need to stop talking like they speak for all PC gamers, we envy that you have such nice rigs so why can't you be nice and take pity on those who can just about afford to keep up with their gaming hobby via old or new consoles while also managing to feed themselves and pay rent.

Gamers come from all walks of life, from rags to riches, its when others come in here and make generalisations like "pc master race" or "console fanboys" etc, that we take two steps back and resort to primal mud slinging that does nobody any favours.

[Stapleface]

Well christian hour, I'm far from a rich person. I do something called save my money. It took me 2 years to come up with the money for my current pc. When PC gamers talk about gaming they are not even thinking about pc's that don't have dedicated GPU's. No one is comparing their 980 to a laptop with nothing but and i5 in it. They are talking about gaming pc's. The average gaming pc can easily do 1080p 60 fps as long as they are not 8+ years old. Even then they might be able to depending on what card they had from back then and what settings they are using.

[Criti-Choco]

gtx970 isnt the most high end, but in comparison to a console price, you could get a complete console for that.

building a rig with a 900 card would cost significantly more especially for someone who is just starting, meaning peripherals, OS, and all the other core parts.

I used to be a heavy pc gamer (would still be if not for my housing situation atm). and I like high frames in situations but I don't need it for everything. As long as frames are stable or not too low and the graphical fidelity is sound most people will not care much.

*EDIT* Just by going the steam survey http://store.steampowered.c...

The most used resolutions are 1920x1080 32.94% and 1366x768 26.68% and above that doesnt even cover 4% infact going by those numbers theres more people playing at 720p and under than at resolutions over 1080.

People gaming over 1080p are really on the minority, most people dont even own monitors or tvs above that

[christian hour]

@stapleface I meant no insult nor did I mean to imply you were rich, unfortunately I'm in a stupid country with a high cost of living, barely anyone can afford to save over here, every penny goes to just getting by, in fact it was this very reason that caused such a huge banking crisis and an incredible amount of country debt once the crash came, people were taking out loans left right and centre just to live exuberant lifestyles and of course it came back and bit em in the butt. Living on a sinking ship here :)

[rocketpanda]

It is a standard....on consoles 15 years ago. And that is unfortunate! 60fps is not a luxury, less powerful hardware compared to the ps4 an xbox one, the wii u manages to get their exclusive games to run at 60fps. Many developers just don't want to put in the effort giving rubbish statements like, "we want to have a more cinematic approach".

Even ps2 games had some games running at 60fps. I remember MGS2 being a consistent 60, and yes it makes a massive difference. If you only played 30 then it won't matter, but playing a game at 60 then trying it again at 30, you will notice the difference.

[christian hour]

15 years ago for ntsc maybe, 15 years ago PAL tvs were still at the standard of 24fps but while having slightly more lines of resolution for a better image quality than NTSC, it had been that way for a long time too. (and this is why US tv broadcasts pre 2000 and something looked wierd on EU tvs back then, for anyone whos always wondered why, less image quality on their end and more frames)

HDMI has of course since done away with the notion of EU and US tv set differences. But lets not forget that tiny fact. It was not the standard for everybody, and in some cases it still isn't (my friend still plays x360 through RGB scart on an old ass tv)

[ATi_Elite]

4k 60fps is a luxury

1080p 60fps is standard for now as Pc upped it to 1200p

1080p 30fps is your almost there.

[starchild]

Well it's common on PC, but it's not on consoles. And I think that is just fine. It's always a matter of trade-offs on consoles and choosing 30fps is generally going to be the better trade-off. It's a sufficient, though not ideal, framerate to enjoy games at.

Those that want to game at higher framerates always have the PC as an option. I'm glad that devs don't cripple our games' graphics just to cater to those who think all console games should run at 60fps.

[MrCrimson]

If you release a shooter at sub-60 fps, you are releasing a failed video game.

[kingduqc]

with current hardware, it's really not. That's the problem.

I've been gaming at 1080p and 60 fps for over 7 years now, 2 years in 1440p and I'll be moving to 4k in a year, I'm a college student so if I can afford it, everyone with a job probably can too.

[ATi_Elite]

Dude once you go 4k everything else sucks and you can never go back.

Even my 1600p monitors look like crap after gaming on my 4k TV.

[poseiden21]

only on the console peasantry.

[SPAM-FRITTER-123]

Were' the Mustard wraithe

[ABizzel1]

1080p provides a much cleaner image than 720p does, more pixels on screen provides a better image with more clarity.

60fps provides less input-lag, provides a better sense of motion, and when animations are designed for 60fps it makes games look, move, and play so much better.

Is there anything wrong with 720p @ 30fps, No. But that was a standard of the PS360 era, and a new console should bring improved hardware and new standards, and moving from 720p @ 30fps up to 1080p @ 60fps is a numerical way of showing evolution.

[kingtroy]

Then what else does the meaning Next-gen stand for. Last gen was 720p 30FPs only seem logical we would want 1080p or 60FPS

[Fro_xoxo]

"Next-Gen" is a marketing term for the gullible.

When I get a console (aware of the specs) I know the level of performance to expect, realistically speaking.

you don't buy bicycle and expect it to move as fast as a motorbike.

If microsoft and sony chose more expensive parts, you'd have to pay more... 600-700 dollars/euros. Then you'd have people complaining that the consoles are too expensive.

[NuggetsOfGod]

It's not ligical at all!!

You only paid $400 lol

What did u expect?

Even planetside 2 has 800 players less than the pc version and that game came out 2011 lol
And on top of that they like many devs are "aiming" for 60fps.
If u want graphics like drive club then 60fps is off the table.

Atleast ps4 is fullhd. Whatever that means
I play at QHD extra fullhd I guess?
One thing is for sure. Sony hiring xbox 360s old marketing company was a great move for them.

But it all comes down to what next gen is for u.
For some its res and graphics. For some it's framerate.

For me it's both.

I am just happy I can run star citizen.

If u want a full next gen experience u are gonna have to pay for.
I think it's worth it. Come 2016 4k 60hz monitors will be cheaper and I
think nvidia will be ready for it.

Ps4 cost $381 to build so they took a $19 lose.
http://venturebeat.com/2013...

[christian hour]

well next-gen is a marketing term, but if you really want an answer its as simple as this.

The increase in power does not just mean an increase in resolution and frames per second. There are a million other benefits, more memory to handle more tasks which will open up new gameplay possibilities and better AI, it will bring you more immersive experiences, less compressed sound and textures etc, I could go on and on and on.

Another thing it does is free multiplatform games from the shackles of older hardware meaning those PC multiplats are gonna start looking a HELL of a lot nicer and people can finally start taking full advantage of an x64 architecture where as before it was safer to develop for the lowest common denominator (xbox360) as, due to the global recession, multiplats became more and more common as they were more financially viable (just look at how many exclusive franchises have now gone multiplat in the last 7 years).

But of course its easier for journalists and marketing to just go "DERP! 60 FRAMES 1080P! future!"

[NerdStalker]

Because it's the best we can hope for and we expect nothing less than the best. Simple!

[gangsta_red]

For the new gen I am looking for bigger and better games to play, more ways for the game to interact and change with the decisions I make, a better more genius way to move the story or action along besides QTE's, something more than just the regular FPS game, a more variety of gameplay, a more innovative way of gameplay design.

Graphics and resolution are nice and I would love for all that I said above to also look pretty while doing it. But it's not the thing I'm only looking for or think it's the most important.

[SpiralTear]

Because game companies made a big deal about it, so we kinda expected them to deliver.

[Mikefizzled]

Marketing and fuel for arguments. At the end of the day I still play 360 and OG Xbox games. Resolution and FPS means little once you get over yourself.

[SteamPowered]

Focusing on 1080P and 60fps takes the pressure off the devs to make a decent game with story and soul. They can print that "1080P" on the front of the game and call it a day.
A great looking game doesnt make it a great game.

[EvilWay]

Because 60 FPS is superior. PC gamers should demand 60fps but console gamers should not expect a solid 60fps consistanly. The hardware of the 8th gen consoles are not tha powerful so it is hard for developers to get a solid 60fps, so we should just accept 30fps because a solid 30fps is better than a shaky 60fps

[Vegamyster]

These consoles can easily do 60 fps if devs make it a priority, i would love for devs to actually include a 30 fps/60 fps option.

[corroios]

Last gen the gold was 720p/30. This gen was 1080/60 but Sony and Microsoft build cheap machines and the standard should be 1080p/30.

[AstroCyborg]

because its long overdo

[DawginTow1]

Why 1080p/60fps...cuz it looks good?

[No_Limit]

For me, only 60fps is a "deal breaker" for certain games like Fighters and Sports games and online FPS.

Knowing the specs of both the current gen consoles that they are indeed using low-powered laptop CPUs and out dated GPus, there is no expectation on my part that every game will be 1080p and 60fps but after playing some games like Dragon Age, Forza Horizon 2, and Titanfalls side by side with the X360 versions, I think the visual upgrade and more on screen effects are a welcome upgrade and 1080p was never entered in my mind when I play the PS4/Xb1 versions of those same games.

What make it worst are the execs that tend to hype up their consoles that is far from realistic results like seen here:

https://twitter.com/shahidk...
hahid Kamal Ahmad ‏@shahidkamal

"There are two words you’re going to hear a lot of when it comes to PS4 and together, they change the game: 1080p 60fps"

https://twitter.com/shahidk...
Shahid Kamal Ahmad ‏@shahidkamal

"Give me 60fps or give me death."

ROFL. hahaha

[Gamer777]

I have yet to play a big budget demanding game on PS4 that runs at 1080p 60 fps locked. Sony hyped up 1080p60fps and don't deliver it with there own first party games. I stopped caring about the 1080p 60fps gate (and resolutiongate)months ago. Just give me a good looking, fun to play game that performs well regardless of its frame rate and res.

[Maxor]

We can't even reach 1080p in all games, nevermind 60 fps. Thats how under powered these consoles are. When I rushed out to preorder my PS4 I thought 1080p would be a sure thing. I thought nobody would bother releasing a console that can't do 1080p as a base feature.

Boy was I wrong.

[VJGenova]

As a pc gamer I will soon be looking to 1440p/1600p/2160p and 60 FPS. Just need to finf the right monitor ...

[starchild]

I think a high refresh rate monitor is more valuable for gaming than a higher resolution monitor.

I would HIGHLY recommend a gsync monitor, or wait for the so-called "freesync" monitors. Either way, trust me, you want a high refresh rate, variable refresh rate monitor. My gsync monitor has been an absolute game changer. By far the most dramatic improvement to my gaming that I have ever seen in a single purchase.

[OmegaShen]

I care if its 60fps more then 1080p, I like a game to run smooth .

[josephayal]

I Don't care Bcoz The upgrade from last gen to this gen is just so minuscule

[marlinfan10]

I think people put wayyyy too much thought into resolution and frame rate. If the game plays good and is fun, who the hell cares what the resolution is?

It's like half these people didn't grow up playing the n64, atari, dreamcast, ps1, etc. (I've got a feeling a lot of people on here actually haven't played any of those) . They'd have a whole new appreciation for what we're playing now. It still amazes me when I stick in games like infamous or ryse and see how far we've come graphics wise.

[GokuSolosAll]

60 FPS is practically required for the Fighting genre so that's why I care. Don't shove your low tier spec preaching down my throat. Plus if we pay good money for powerful consoles then we should get those specs I only care about those issues in principal though, aside from Fighting games.

[Somebody]

"At the beginning of the current console generation, hardcore gamers and game marketers decided on a benchmark for consoles"

Oh, no. Don't you try to put the blame solely on gamers. It was the gaming media who speculated that the new consoles can do such things. It was the gaming media that planted the seeds of high expectations long before launch.

Remember, after the PS4's first announcement the media had a frenzy speculating what it can do. Many said 1080P standard for consoles is finally here while a taste of 2K might even be possible. Then they used the PS4 to gauge the XBO followed by more comparisons and speculations.

When the consoles finally launched, gamer and marketers have their heads full of 1080P and 60FPS possibilities planted by the gaming media for months. Disappointment was to be expected.

[Dudebro90]

Because marketing. It gives gamers something to complain about and point a finger at something they can over exaggerate it's importance.

[Geekman]

It really doesn't matter if the game is 900p or 1080p, but unless it's a really big open world game the frame rate should always be at 60fps.

[KimoNoir]

60fps feels better with control response and pleasing to the eyes.
1080p is all about the attention to visual detail.

[Shinuz]

I prefer 1080 and 120+ fps.

[quenomamen]

Yea I wish these morons would STFU already about 1080p this and 60fps that !
- goes back to watching HD TV, watching Bluray movie, streaming HD movie, playing video games on a 55" HD TV.

[WikusVanDeMerwe]

720p is blurry when you are use to 1080p or greater. 30 fps is sluggish when you are use to 60fps or greater. Is this really so hard to understand?

When you spend years gaming in your time off at those rates you adjust and anything lower becomes undesirable. It is just that simple, it really is.

[SuperbVillain]

Battlefield 4 is 60fps on ps4?

[N4GJD]

Why do people care about resolution over framerate? Do they not realize without a high framerate; that 1080p image looks like garbage in motion (blurry, etc)?

And it's quite amazing with these new consoles being at least 8 times more powerful then last generation (where 720p/30fps was frequent); they're not 1080p/60fps (only x2). It has to be development prioritizing visual detail over all else! #stupid