60
Hellblade 2 will be 30fps only on Xbox consoles
(www.eurogamer.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
60 points (98.4% liked)
Games
16672 readers
945 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If you pushed so hard that you can't hit 60 fps then you need to pull back. It's not state of the art if it looks like a slideshow.
I'm with you, but 30 FPS isn't a slideshow. And ever since we were able to get 60 FPS on consoles, devs have been willing to forgo it for fidelity at lower frame rates. I didn't see any reason that trend would stop now.
And that new Marvel game will also be a game with state of the art real time graphics, and it will also run at 30 FPS. Same with GTA 6.
Saying it's "state of the art" isn't an excuse for poor optimization. Developers have been able to pump out 60fps on way worse hardware and still make it look good. We have more powerful hardware now but worse software. In the past 8 years alone new optimization techniques have been found but no one uses them
Just because Hellblade 2 runs at 30 FPS, it doesn't mean it's optimized worse than Metal Gear Solid 2. There's way more being processed per second in order to render Senua than there is to render Raiden, and it's a trade-off that the developers decided was worth it, even if you and I disagree. That still doesn't mean it's poorly optimized.
Generally agree but there's a good chance it is less optimized than MGS2 because that game pushed the hardware to its limits
If you can't understand why some games can run at 60 and others can't, then I can't help you.
I completely understand it. Publishers want pretty graphics at all cost and give 0 time for developers to optimize it
Do you think Hellblade II could run on a NES, given infinite development time to optimize it?
No clearly not but we're talked about the latest console from Microsoft. Not saying it's insanely powerful but it sure as shit ain't weak or outdated hardware
Then you can acknowledge that there are limits to what video games can run on a given set of hardware, regardless of optimization. There's been diminishing returns in graphics processing since the beginning of time. In order to get to that next step of realism, it's going to cost more than it took the last time we saw a similar leap.
I'd take a lower resolution over 30fps any day, I don't understand why it's not an option for some games.
PC can do it no problem.
Well, GTA 6 is also going to be running at 1080p instead of 4K, so that is an option some games use on consoles. I think Jedi Survivor only ran at 720p30, but that one we definitely can say is poorly optimized.
That's rough, maybe the new consoles are already falling behind in tech,I thought they were more powerful.
And we've also got a new generation of graphics hardware in the 4 years since the last gen came out. This isn't new and is always going to happen when you can't upgrade your hardware. 30fps isn't even that bad, even if its not great.